Path: newssvr20.news.prodigy.com!newsmst01.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!news-FFM2.ecrc.net!newsfeed.vmunix.org!newsfeed.wirehub.nl!newshub3.home.nl!newshub1.home.nl!home.nl!not-for-mail From: Frank van Bortel Newsgroups: comp.databases.oracle.server Subject: Re: Enable 32K Block in 8K Block DB Date: Sun, 04 Apr 2004 14:07:28 +0200 Organization: @Home Benelux Lines: 41 Message-ID: References: <83dbb3cd.0403281556.43addf38@posting.google.com> <406775f0$0$13661$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au> <83dbb3cd.0403290528.7dae3736@posting.google.com> <40687d58$0$28283$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au> Reply-To: fvanbortel@netscape.net NNTP-Posting-Host: cc28855-a.hnglo1.ov.home.nl Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: news3.tilbu1.nb.home.nl 1081080292 3568 217.121.193.81 (4 Apr 2004 12:04:52 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@home.nl NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 4 Apr 2004 12:04:52 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en In-Reply-To: <40687d58$0$28283$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au> Xref: newssvr20.news.prodigy.com comp.databases.oracle.server:258883 Howard J. Rogers wrote: > "Charles" wrote in message > news:83dbb3cd.0403290528.7dae3736@posting.google.com... > > >>Thank you for replying. >> >>The database I am working with is a 1.8TB SAP R/3 oracle database. I >>wanted to reorganize its indices into 32K tablespaces since some >>Oracle Performance book author(s) have indicated that's a good idea >>for indices. > > > It's not, and the advice is utter nonsense. > > Unless you are running on raw, or have a file system that can do direct I/O, > then mucking about with your block sizes is (a) a complete waste of time and > (b) is actually going to introduce performance problems. [SNIP!] And it's that exception, that gets forgotten, not emphasized enough, or whatever, that feeds the general impression of "big is better" . Even in Steve's article (http://www.ixora.com.au/tips/block_size.htm), it's quite easy to read over it, and get the impression you can do it on *any* filesystem. Bottom line (still) is - don't use buffered IO; use direct or raw (why do you think every benchmark of oracle still uses raw?!?) Now - how do I convince the SA to go raw on his HP machine with VX7100, where he found a benchmark that proofs he was right to create the filesystem with 8k blocks? -- Regards, Frank van Bortel