Re: partitioned table-number of tablespaces (oracle 10g2)
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 18:33:48 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <pan.2010.12.17.18.33.48_at_email.here.invalid>
On Fri, 17 Dec 2010 02:33:52 -0800, Michał Jabłoński wrote:
> I think about performance, time of execution sql on this table. In this
> case it is better to create more tablespaces with one datafile or less
> with one or more datafiles? Or it doesn't matter?
These days, "disk partition" is something allocated on SAN, probably a RADI 10 device, striped across several physical disks and duplicated. It's quite frequently cached in SAN based cached, typically several GB in size, with write back strategy and a battery backup. So called "I/O" performance depends on the speed of HBA and FC/AL link between the system and the SAN, the amount of RAM on SAN and the caching, the type of disks being used (SATA and SCSI are the most frequent alternatives), optimization techniques employed by SAN (shortest path firs, priority queue and FIFO are the most frequent examples). The whole philosophy of "separating data to different disks" is as obsolete as the terminator model 1.
-- http://mgogala.byethost5.comReceived on Fri Dec 17 2010 - 12:33:48 CST