Re: Imported DB runs SLOWER on faster machine

On a slope however, the tractor can tip over and kill the driver.

"Telemachus" <telemachus_at_ulysseswillreturn.net> wrote in message news:8we%8.4325$zX3.3495_at_news.indigo.ie...
> It depends on what gear your small car is in.
>
> Additionally your tractor can pull a hell of a lot more - including
pulling
> you out of the mud.
> "Svend Jensen" <svend.jensen_at_it.dk> wrote in message
> news:3D3D6773.4000206_at_it.dk...
> > Rick Denoire wrote:
> >
> > > Hello
> > >
> > > I just exported some schemas from an Oracle DB (8.1.7, Solaris) and
> > > imported them into a Test DB (Windows NT). Die PC is somewhat faster
> > > than the Sun Enterprise 3500 (although it has 4 CPUs , UltraSparc II,
> > > and a Raid), as I could confirm doing some tests without the DB.
> > >
> > > But some long running applications seem to never end on this PC. A job
> > > running about 4 min on the Sun system seems to run for DAYS not! I was
> > > able to determine that it definitely has something to do with I/O.
> > > Well, this PC has a cheap Promise controller and a Raid 0 system with
> > > 4 EIDE disks. As I said, using other applications and benchmarks
> > > proved that the system is really fast (Athon 2000+ MHz, 1.5 GB RAM,
> > >
> > >>50 MB/sec sustained transfer rate from the harddisks.
> > >>
> > >
> > > Two possibilities:
> > > 1 - the data chunks read by Oracle mismatch the overall stripe size of
> > > the Raid 0 disks. Oracle always reads at least db_blocksize x
> > > db_file_multiblock_read_count. I could not find out the stripe
> > > parameters, because there was no chance to reboot the PC.
> > >
> > > 2 - Datafiles on the NT system are too large (>20GB). I just forgot
> > > that it is not Unix :-) Could anyone comment on maximum Oracle
> > > datafile size under Windows NT SP 6? But hey, the DB works somehow.
> > >
> > > Anyway, when the application runs, there is ALWAYS contention of type
> > > db_sequential_read, and as one updates the number of logical read
> > > blocks, it is possible to see how slow this operation works. The CPU
> > > is almost idle, contrary to the Raid.
> > >
> > > But I still know nothing about the real CAUSE of the problem. Could
> > > any one out there give me some hints about how to identify it?
> > >
> > > Thanks a lot
> > >
> > > Rick Denoire
> > >
> > >
> >
> > I can hardly believe you think a PC with 2000Mhz cpu is faster than a 4
> > cpu UltraSparc II with raid !
> > I have a tractor with ~170 HP engine, and it can not outrun my small car
> > with a 90 HP engine.
> > It takes more than clockcycles to perform and you have a long way to go.
> > Wasted clock cycles are gone forever, among others....
> >
> > /Svend Jensen
> >
>
>
Received on Tue Jul 23 2002 - 10:41:37 CDT