Re: Oracle Upgrading = performance improvement?

Hello,

thanks for your reply.
OK, I'll check, if there could be an I/O bottleneck.

Thank you for your detailed reply.

Axel

"Vladimir M. Zakharychev" <bob_at_dpsp-yes.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:atkqet$5o9$1_at_babylon.agtel.net...
> > There can be many factors, that the ERP is running slow on that
database,
> > but my question is, if there are any known performance improvements
> > from 8.0.5 to 8.1.7.3 ?
> > I ask this question to calculate, if it is worth the time, upgrading to
> > 8.1.7.3
> > so there are any chances to gain more speed.
>
> Well, there was a slew of new features and improvements in 8.1.7 as
> compared to 8.0.5 (and, of course, bugfixes), but I doubt that upgrade
> all by itself will instantly boost performance.
>
> > P.S.: Does Oracle 8 run more fast, if we would just add another or maybe
> > 2 additional Processors, does Oracle "use" them without any further
actions?
>
> Yes for the second part of the question (Oracle automatically recognizes
new
> CPUs and can use them without intervention), it depends for the first - if
your
> system is CPU-bound (that is, there's not enough raw CPU power) then
adding
> more processors will certainly relieve the situation. But if it is
I/O-bound
> then additional processors will not help - Oracle will waste most of its
time
> waiting for I/Os to complete and CPUs will be idle most of the time. You
> should first diagnose your system, find where contention is and why and
> act accordingly (tune SQL, tune instance, throw in more hardware
resources,
> switch ERP vendor, etc.) Just adding more processor power or upgrading to
a
> newer release won't magically get rid of bottlenecks introduced in poorly
written
> application or improperly configured system.
>
> My $0.02.
>
> --
> Vladimir Zakharychev (bob_at_dpsp-yes.com)
http://www.dpsp-yes.com
> Dynamic PSP(tm) - the first true RAD toolkit for Oracle-based internet
applications.
> All opinions are mine and do not necessarily go in line with those of my
employer.
>
Received on Tue Dec 17 2002 - 04:33:55 CST