Re: Spindles and big disks

KineticGuy wrote:
>
> I grew up on the philosophy that databases perform better with more spindles
> and by isolating hot areas to their own groups. This concept still makes
> sense to me.
>
> Now the minimum disk sizes available are 9 GB and hardware caching is the
> hot thing. What are folks doing with this issue when sizing new systems.
> If you have a 40GB database, it's getting harder to justify the costs for as
> many spindles versus the old 1GB - 4GB days.
>
> I'm interested in thoughts that people have on this.

        Increase the amount of RAM and then increase the number of db_block_buffers and cache all of your small tables. The end result is a lot of your data will get loaded into RAM and stay there. As a result the number of disk accesses will drop. Also, it is easier to sell management on the idea of adding RAM than it is to convince them to add spindles.

-- 
Jerry Gitomer
Once I learned how to spell DBA, I became one.