Re: Oracle 9i tunning

Cool! A pleasent, helpful and non-condencending response.

It isn't too late for change RAID - I am still in the system analysis portion of my project and am testing different configurations. I am a one person shop I have full control! I think RAID 5 works well with SQL server because you don't have control of tablespaces and datafiles like you do in Oracle. I would like some fault tollarance above restoring backup tapes, given this, what do you recommend for disk configuration?

Here is my current situation with hardware:

Dual AMD athlonn MP 2000+
2 Gigs DDR Ram
RAID (PCI) controller that supports 4 devices with 32MB RAM mounted (Adaptec 2400A)
 6 Western Digital 80 Gig (8MB cache) ATA/100 disks Total Flexibility!

Anyone is welcome to submit a vote to optimize hardware configuration for Oracle!

"Howard J. Rogers" <dba_at_hjrdba.com> wrote in message news:af7s4g$44d$1_at_lust.ihug.co.nz...
> Hi Joe,
>
> You seem to have had a run of bad luck with the responses you;ve received.
>
> First, if it were that hard to use Oracle effectively, I'd be out of a job
> teaching people to do it. It's not hard, the responses you've receoved are
> atypical, and you're on the right lines.
>
> Bumping up sort_area_size to extremely large levels within the session is
a
> good move, actually, because nobody gets ANY sort_area_size until they
> actually use it, at which point it grows up to the maximum specified by
that
> parameter. At the end of the sort, it shrinks right back down to zero.
> Unfortunately, it's the case that the memory is often not returned back to
> the operating system, merely freed within the memory space allocated to
> Oracle. I haven't actually tested it on Windows... but it would be easy
> enough to do. Call up Task Manager, and look at the 'Performance' tab as
the
> sort proceeds. If the memory is going to be released back to the O/S,
you'll
> see the graph rise and then drop back. Also, though, keep an eye on how
much
> paging Windows starts doing. If your huge sort_area_size induces extra
> paging, then that's a BAD thing!!
>
> 1b might be a bit ambitious... but test it and see. If it comes back to
the
> box after the sort, you've done the right thing. If it doesn't, re-think.
>
> Bump up your degree of parallelism, too. I was testing a 24-processor
> solaris box the other day. Got my degree of parallelism up to 3000!!
That's
> going way over the top, though. On a dual-processor box, try bumping it up
> to 4 or 8. Should be perfectly acceptable.
>
> Nologging is fine for create index.
>
> RAID 5 isn't. But I guess you can't do much about that! (And it's not the
> total and utter evil it's made out to be, either).
>
> You are, in short, on the right track. A bit more parallelism, and go easy
> with sort_area_size in respect of possible additional paging. Otherwise, I
> can't think of an awful lot more than you can do.
>
> And don't use SQL Server. Oracle is just fine and dandy!!
>
> Regards
> HJR
>
>
>
> "Joe" <joegenshlea_at_attbi.com> wrote in message
> news:d9HR8.139197$nZ3.58364_at_rwcrnsc53...
> > Hi,
> >
> > Environment: Oracle 9i running on Windows 2000.
> > Hardware: Dual AMD, 2 Gig Ram, RAID 5 disk array (ATA/100)
> > Application: Datawarehousing
> >
> > I am process of evaluating Oracle 9i and SQL server for a datawarehouse
> > application and have some questions on how to tune 9i to maximize
> > performance on index building and sorting in general.
> >
> > There is a large fact table (80 million rows) that I am testing in both
> > environments (SQL and Oracle). I am attempting to build an index on the
> > table want to insure that I have things set up so that Oracle will use
as
> > much memory and processor as possible. When building indexes Oracle is
> > using about 400MB or the 2 Gigs of RAM and only uses 10%-15% of one
> > processsor and 0% of the other.
> >
> > Here is what I have done so far.
> > - Created a temporary 4GB tablespace and set it to default for the
> user
> > account I use.
> > - increased the sort_area_size for the session to 1GB.
> > - specify nologging and paralell 2 in the create index DDLs
> >
> > Is this the best I can do to maximize sort procesess?
> >
> > Joe
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
Received on Mon Jun 24 2002 - 14:55:01 CDT