Re: Data Buffer Cache

"Ricky Sanchez" <rsanchez_at_more.net> wrote in message news:3D863217.E4AF8535_at_more.net...
> Howard-
>
> Do you mention the concomitant increase in recovery time when you
> suggest huge redo logs? Or do you find that not to be a concern for
> customers?
>

Yeah, I get them to work out what the trade-off is for themselves. After that, it's up to them. I tend to suggest that with redundant power supplies, UPSes and a decent operating system (cue the Microsoft jokes!) that the risks of Instance failure can be over-weighted. But ultimately it's their call.

I also tell them of the 'one switch per hour' school of DBAing, so they get both sides.

Regards
HJR
> - ricky
>
> "Howard J. Rogers" wrote:
> >
> >
> > Quite so, and my standard advice is precisely this... but that's because
the
> > I/O associated with any checkpoint (ie, log switch) is obviously an
overhead
> > that must be paid for in performance, not because the database actually
> > grinds to a halt waiting for a checkpoint to finish.
> >
Received on Tue Sep 17 2002 - 04:12:01 CDT