Re: block_size for large DB
From: Bluware <bluware_at_aol.com>
Date: 13 Nov 1994 12:15:19 -0500
Message-ID: <3a5hj7$5oa_at_newsbf01.news.aol.com>
Date: 13 Nov 1994 12:15:19 -0500
Message-ID: <3a5hj7$5oa_at_newsbf01.news.aol.com>
In article <dischner-1409941621380001_at_gkc12a.klch.med.uni-muenchen.de>, dischner_at_med.uni-muenchen.de (Anton Dischner) writes:
I make *ALL* Oracle databases with the 8192 block size. The 10% savings you see is the result of processing fewer block headers to retrieve the data. The smaller blocks, 4k and 2k, still have essentially the same size block header (around 100 bytes) and thus waste space. We do not care about space on disk anymore, since it is cheap. The waste is filling the SGA with these additional block headers and making Oracle process them to retrieve *ANY* data (index, cluster, table). Go with the large block size, and lobby for bigger ones!
-Rick Jones-
- You know the story, my words, not to be confused with fact, no guarantee
- etc, etc, etc..