Re: Oracle 9i tunning

Joe,

I am glad that I finally come to the right branch of your tree. I swear I have never posted any nonsense (meaningless) posting like this before. Simply can't help this time. Sorry about this.

Peter

"Joe" <joegenshlea_at_attbi.com> wrote in message news:pOKR8.165885$6m5.138459_at_rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net...
> 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 Fri Jun 28 2002 - 08:00:15 CDT