Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid
HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US
 

Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.server -> Re: Scalable Performace - Inserts/Updates

Re: Scalable Performace - Inserts/Updates

From: Joel Garry <jgarry_at_my-deja.com>
Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2001 16:07:40 GMT
Message-ID: <932744$f37$1@nnrp1.deja.com>

In article <978088771.19827.0.nnrp-08.9e984b29_at_news.demon.co.uk>,   "Jonathan Lewis" <jonathan_at_jlcomp.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Comments in-line.
>
> --
> Jonathan Lewis
> Yet another Oracle-related web site: http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk
>
> Practical Oracle 8i: Building Efficient Databases
>
> Publishers: Addison-Wesley
> See a first review at:
> http://www.ixora.com.au/resources/index.htm#practical_8i
> More reviews at: http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/book_rev.html
>
> Joel Garry wrote in message <92b22u$vg4$1_at_nnrp1.deja.com>...
> >In article <977519319.7059.0.nnrp-13.9e984b29_at_news.demon.co.uk>,
> > "Jonathan Lewis" <jonathan_at_jlcomp.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> >>
> >> Is it the performance or the safety you worry about ?
> >
> >Haven't seen any real requirements defined for either, now that you
> >mention it.
> >
> >>
> >> Yes, the SAN on a fibre can be faster than a local
> >> disk, especially since SANs tend to come complete
> >> with battery backed buffers.
> >>
> >> Yes, the SAN is as safe as the local disk (it must
> >> be or you wouldn't be able to run any Oracle data
> >> file on it at all).
> >
> >Well, why couldn't you run Oracle on an unsafe disk? At least,
 until
> >it actually does something wrong!
> >
>
> At least it would give you some peace of mind. You could
> be confident that something was going to go wrong; whereas
> with safe disks, you have room for doubt ;) On the other hand
> I had to guess that your guts were complaining because of an
> assumed new danger. Be comforted - if it is not safe to put the
> redo logs on the SAN, you ought to get the rest of the database
> off there too.

Nothing like a good tummy-rub. Thanks!

>
> >To split some obvious hairs: Battery backup has nothing to do with
> >transfer rate (excepting 0 rate with no power of course).
>
> I think you may have missed BUFFER as the operative word.
> In terms of speed, the SAN buffer technology can be particularly
> helpful for improving throughput on redo logs.

Ah, ok.

jg

--
These opinions mine
mailto:joel-garry_at_nospam.home.com
Remove nospam to mail
http://www.garry.to


Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
Received on Thu Jan 04 2001 - 10:07:40 CST

Original text of this message

HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US