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: Large Tables, continued

Re: Large Tables, continued

From: Jim Kennedy <kennedy-downwithspammersfamily_at_attbi.net>
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 18:25:37 GMT
Message-ID: <B_0zc.26840$eu.25621@attbi_s02>

"Markus Vohburger" <markus.vohburger_at_t-online.de> wrote in message news:cai3el$ua6$02$1_at_news.t-online.com...
> Somehow lost the original Thread....
>
> Here are some results from my tests done with large Oracle Tables
>
> my table looks like this:
>
> table artikeljournal:
> FILIAL_ID NUMBER NOT NULL,
>
> ARTIKEL_ID NUMBER NOT NULL,
>
> MENGE FLOAT,
>
> WERT FLOAT,
>
> TIMESTAMP DATE
>
> seperate tablespace for table artikeljournal on an extra Drive, about
2.5GB
> in size
>
> Index on Filial_ID and Artikel_ID,
>
> 5 partitions , partitioned by range timestamp per year, Test data
generated
> for 5 years, a total of 60.000.000 records
>
> Test data was loaded with about 6600 Rows/second with SQLloader in Direct
> Mode
>
> Response time for typical queries i need is 1 to 20 Seconds. My system is
a
> W2000 Server on an AMD Athlon 2000 with 256 MB Ram and IDE Drives. Oracle
> 8.1.7 EE.
>
> The System is low on RAM, it needs 450MB and has only 256, so the
> Performace that i get even from my small test System is quite impressing.
>
> No other performance tuning has been done on the Database yet!
>
> As the real system will be a much faster system with enough Ram, i think
> everything will work out fine. Most of the work will be done with much
> smaller pre-calculated tables, maybe i will use materialized Views for
them.
>
>
>
> thanks to all !
>
>
>
> MV
>

You really need more drives to improve IO. Also bind variables are important.
Jim Received on Sun Jun 13 2004 - 13:25:37 CDT

Original text of this message

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