Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid
HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US
 

Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.server -> Re: RH Linux 8 vs Windows XP -- Question...

Re: RH Linux 8 vs Windows XP -- Question...

From: Tanel Poder <change_to_my_first_name_at_integrid.info>
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 00:51:58 +0300
Message-ID: <3f6e1d7f$1_1@news.estpak.ee>


Hi!

Which version?
Are the servers equal?
Are the datafile and redolog layouts equal? What are the differences in init.ora parameters? Are the tablespaces and segment free space in both examples managed the same way? (DMT vs LMT, Freelists vs ASSM)?
Are the logging attributes the same in both examples? Are execution plans the same?
etc..
etc..

Tanel.

"Jan van Mourik" <jmourik_at_yahoo.com> wrote in message news:ffe966de.0309211236.41025f04_at_posting.google.com...
> Gentlemen...
>
> I'm wondering if anybody has encountered something similar...
> I'm running Tom Kyte's script to create BIG_TABLE on two play
> databases I run, one on RH Linux 8, one on XP. They have been
> configured similarly, init.ora parameters are pretty much the same.
> Yet, look at these tkprof snippets:
>
> XP
> INSERT /*+ APPEND */ into big_table
> select rownum+:b1,
> OWNER, OBJECT_NAME, SUBOBJECT_NAME,
> OBJECT_ID, DATA_OBJECT_ID,
> OBJECT_TYPE, CREATED, LAST_DDL_TIME,
> TIMESTAMP, STATUS, TEMPORARY,
> GENERATED, SECONDARY
> from big_table
> where rownum <= :b2-:b1
>
> call count cpu elapsed disk query current
> rows
> ------- ------ -------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
> --------
> Parse 1 0.00 0.00 0 0 0
> 0
> Execute 6 5.37 10.97 8365 14635 2133
> 970885
> Fetch 0 0.00 0.00 0 0 0
> 0
> ------- ------ -------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
> --------
> total 7 5.37 10.97 8365 14635 2133
> 970885
>
> versus Linux:
>
> call count cpu elapsed disk query current
> rows
> ------- ------ -------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
> --------
> Parse 1 0.00 0.00 0 0 0
> 0
> Execute 6 12.81 33.79 7601 14635 2130
> 970482
> Fetch 0 0.00 0.00 0 0 0
> 0
> ------- ------ -------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
> --------
> total 7 12.82 33.79 7601 14635 2130
> 970482
>
> Roughly the same number of rows, but a big difference in cpu and
> elapsed. XP is much faster!!!
> When I run the workload simulation setup from Kyte's book 'Effective
> Oracle by design' (p. 314) the linux box beats the pants of the XP.
> But loading the table is a lot slower. Makes me wonder if something in
> my Linux setup is bad...
> Any ideas?
>
> jan
Received on Sun Sep 21 2003 - 16:51:58 CDT

Original text of this message

HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US