Received: (qmail 30404 invoked from network); 2 Feb 2009 18:46:39 -0600 Received: from freelists-180.iquest.net (HELO turing.freelists.org) (206.53.239.180) by static-ip-85-25-126-90.inaddr.intergenia.de with SMTP; 2 Feb 2009 18:46:35 -0600 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id BE812B8FF01; Mon, 2 Feb 2009 19:42:47 -0500 (EST) Received: from turing.freelists.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (turing.freelists.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 17963-06; Mon, 2 Feb 2009 19:42:47 -0500 (EST) Received: from turing.freelists.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id 0D213B90D59; Mon, 2 Feb 2009 19:42:47 -0500 (EST) Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list oracle-l); Mon, 02 Feb 2009 19:40:39 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id 106BAB9069B for ; Mon, 2 Feb 2009 19:40:39 -0500 (EST) Received: from turing.freelists.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (turing.freelists.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 17384-01 for ; Mon, 2 Feb 2009 19:40:38 -0500 (EST) Received: from wf-out-1314.google.com (wf-out-1314.google.com [209.85.200.175]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id C7D57B8D944 for ; Mon, 2 Feb 2009 19:40:28 -0500 (EST) Received: by wf-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id 28so1842906wfa.25 for ; Mon, 02 Feb 2009 16:40:24 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.142.143.14 with SMTP id q14mr2064888wfd.213.1233621623955; Mon, 02 Feb 2009 16:40:23 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <0016367ed4e1da4edd0461f4ac6a@google.com> References: <0016367ed4e1da4edd0461f4ac6a@google.com> Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 16:40:23 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Large block sizes for OLAP database From: Greg Rahn To: stmontgo@gmail.com Cc: oracle-l@freelists.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-archive-position: 14396 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org Errors-to: oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org X-original-sender: greg@structureddata.org Precedence: normal Reply-to: greg@structureddata.org List-help: List-unsubscribe: List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0 List-Id: oracle-l X-List-ID: oracle-l List-subscribe: List-owner: List-post: List-archive: X-list: oracle-l X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at localhost.localdomain I worked on a project that had a 17TB (compressed) partitioned table and 32TB of temp space using an 8k block. This was a straight forward dimensional model and there were not any tables with extremely long rows (none that exceeded an 8k block). I guess it depends on what "OLAP type" means in terms of implementation. Personally I see little value in different block sizes (I use 8k). There are numerous other design decisions that have far more performance impact. On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 11:36 AM, wrote: > Good day, > We're jumping into the wonderfull world of Oracle Business Intelligence with > HR Analytics. > > It looks like we'll be creating an OLAP type of database where Oracle > recommends > large block sizes. The database will also contain some metadata for the > Informatica Configuration > and HR Analytics portion. > > If I'm looking at larger block sizes and am wondering if I should be > creating the database with > a large block size or should I be looking at creating tablespaces with > larger block sizes > and leaving the db with a standard 8k size. > > Does anyone have an opion either way? -- Regards, Greg Rahn http://structureddata.org -- http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l