Oracle vs filesystem block size

From: Gavin Maltby, Vector Durban <gavin_at_durban.vector.co.za>
Date: 6 Oct 1994 11:07:39 GMT
Message-ID: <370lps$e3q_at_ticsa.com>


Hi,

According to the docs, the db_block_size for Oracle should be a multiple of the filesystem block size on which the datafiles reside. That makes good sense for random access. For large databases I figure 8K for both is fine.

A client running Oracle 6 on HP series 800 with logical volume manager want to optimise block sizes when they move to 7. What may have been a lack of communication between the dba and the sys admin has resulted in the newer parts of the database residing on 4Gb fast-wide disks with a filesystem block size of 64K, while the db_block_size is 2K. My feeling is that both should be moved to 8K (Oracle max). There is a suggestion that just the Oracle block size could be moved to 8K while the filesytems could stay at 64K---I don't like it.

Anyone with experience/opinions on db_block_size vs filesystem block size---I'd be pleased to hear from you.

Thanks

Gavin

---
      .
     /| The
    / | Vector 
   /  | Group   ---------------------------------------
  /\  |____           Gavin Maltby, Vector Durban
 /  \/|    |          Email: gavin_at_durban.vector.co.za
 \   \|    |          Tel: INT+ 27 31 266 9948
  \   |   /           Fax: INT+ 27 31 266 0811
   \  |  /            Note: I speak for myself, and not
    \ | /             necessarily for Vector or Sun!
     \|/         --------------------------------------
      " Sun Partner in South Africa
Received on Thu Oct 06 1994 - 12:07:39 CET

Original text of this message