Re: Archive Log affects performance?

Clearly, you are having IO contention.

Given that the whole archivelog to non-archive log to archive log operation takes but a few minutes and the update takes many hours it looks like:

1. either fix the IO problem or 2.turn off logging

I am sure a complete restore takes less time than the difference between archive and non archive runs. Are the archive logs residing on a raid 5 disk?

Jim

"Noodles" <noodles_at_aol.com> wrote in message news:20020119152000.19053.00002446_at_mb-cl.aol.com...
> Jim,
>
> The N-class box ( no-archive logging) with a test set of 1.36 million
rows,
> takes 4 hours. The N-class ( with archive logging), with the same test
set,
> takes 8.2 hours. I was expecting a little difference because of the
N-class vs
> the K-class but a factor of 2 ?
>
> I just want to make sure I can get this update to run as FAST as possible
> because the update needs to run on 5 tables in 46 databases.
>
> TIA,
> Cliff
>
>
> << Given the machines are beefy, I don't think this will be a problem.
>
> How long is it taking with archiving - a multi-million row update
shouldn't
> take that long. >>
>
>
>
Received on Sat Jan 19 2002 - 15:13:01 CST