Re: Sparse TEMP files

Actually I think you are right and I was wrong.

It should be actually FASTER for temp files. For temp files, the OS blocks do not exist, and OS will not have to read them in first! I do not think that modifying inode pointers or formating the blocks by Oracle will be any significant overhead, as both are in memory operations.

However, Oracle's implementation may turn our speculations upside down.

For my organization, though, the monitoring considerations prevail and I would rather do what I suggested.

Yong Huang wrote:

> Karen <abvk_at_ureach.com> wrote in message news:<3D27E270.D86488D9_at_ureach.com>...
> > b) the performance
> > will be slower for the first queries that use the tablespace.
>
> I'd like to know why the first use of a sparse tempfile would be
> slower than if the file were actually filled with data. If it *is*
> indeed true, it's probably not because the "holes" have to be written
> with real data; it may be because the inode pointers have to point
> somewhere instead of nowhere? Do you have a benchmark or a theoretical
> proof?
>
> Yong Huang
Received on Sun Jul 07 2002 - 23:53:45 CDT