Re: Designing database tables for performance?

From: Cimode <cimode_at_hotmail.com>
Date: 21 Feb 2007 00:36:27 -0800
Message-ID: <1172046987.100621.21760_at_j27g2000cwj.googlegroups.com>


On Feb 21, 12:24 am, paul c <toledobythe..._at_oohay.ac> wrote:
> joel garry wrote:
> > On Feb 19, 5:03 am, Bob Badour <bbad..._at_pei.sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
> >>Timasmith wrote:
>
> >>>On Feb 18, 8:00 pm, "Mike Preece" <mich..._at_preece.net> wrote:
>
> >>>>On Feb 9, 5:04 am, "Timasmith" <timasm..._at_hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>>>Are you interested in logical or physical performance?
>
> >>Oh my! Can anyone imagine anything more embarassing than Mike's
> >>question? Should we all point and laugh now?
>
> > Welllll.... I think they are laughing, but not at who you think. See
> >http://www.diku.dk/undervisning/2003f/729/papers/millsap.pdf
> > ...
>
> I'm sure the majority is laughing but what they laugh at is rarely the
> important point.
Yep. Last time I discussed database issues with an ORACLE guru, he was trying to convince me that RAM was logical as opposed to Hard drive which was physical. To the ORACLE gurus, as soon as it is in memory, it becomes totally logical. A total absurdity of course... Received on Wed Feb 21 2007 - 09:36:27 CET

Original text of this message