Re: Cluster vs Unclustered

Hey Konstantin

Nastarovia ??

Anyway, You stated that maintanence of Clusters are a nightmare. Especialy in a large system. Can you please elaborate as these tables we will be creating will have a lot of activity in the form of mass additions and updates. Why are index rebuilds difficult? The queries on these tables currently take in the region of 3 to 4 hours (Badly designed database and weak server) even though the database is in the first few months of its life. (I am pushing strongly for a total redesign which seems to have acceptance (but theyy are stalling)). In the meantime we will be moving the current database to a new machine, hence my questions.

What type of impact does a cluster have on the mass addition of data?

Cheers
  Charles

Konstantin Kivi wrote:
>
> Charles McDon1ld <cmcdon12_at_ford.com> writes:
>
> > Hello All
> >
> > I have a number of large tables that are related.
> > ie EntityTable, EntitySpec, Costs, Mixes & Revenues.
> >
> > Now I do not know which would be better. To place all these tables on a
> > single cluster (on ItemCode) or if I should place some of them on a
> > seperate tablespace (With seperate disks)
> >
> > Later
> > Charles
>
> We have such situation with airline passenger name records (PNR).
> From my point of view this can provide great performance
> on a weak machine (one index instead of many) - less memory
> required and much less disk activity, but is a
> maintenance nightmare, especially for 24x7 system, like we have.
> Export,import, index (re)creation are almost impossible,
> with a huge cluster that consists of many tables.
>
> --
> Sincerely Yours, Konstantin Kivi, Russia, konst_at_sirena.rinet.ru
Received on Thu Jun 17 1999 - 05:15:17 CDT