Does anybody know if there is a similar option for SQL Server 2008?

 

Regards,

 

Andrew Goodall

Software Engineer 2 | Development Services |  jcpenney . www.jcp.com
<http://www.jcp.com/>  

________________________________

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of patrick zandi
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 1:44 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Performance question CTM:People timing

 

** I have done this in the past:: pin "user" (T30 for me) table, this
will drop IO to database.. have see this alot.. 



On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 2:36 PM, Guillaume Rheault <guilla...@dcshq.com>
wrote:

** 

Hi Joe, 

I got to disagree with you again... but I guess this is what makes this
ARS list fun!

Pinning a table into memory is not an overkill, it is quite simple to
do, you can ask your Oracle DBA. Since the cost of physical memory is
lower and lower every year, it is actually more cost-effective to add
some more memory to your database server and pin look-up tables, than
optimizing the searches to these look-up tables; optimizing the searches
will involves one or more of the following:

- Possible DBA time to analyze the performance of queries
- Remedy Admin/Developer/Consultant time to figure where those
sub-optimal searches are being issued from, and modify them
- Possible customizations to the ITSM application (which is what
everybody is trying to avoid)

Pinning a table into memory involves:

- Small amount of DBA time to alter the T table to pin it.
- Small amount of sys admin to add memory in the database server (this
cost is a one time cost)

See, when you pin the table in memory, it does NOT matter if your
queries are crappy or inefficient, since the table data is in memory;
that's the beauty of it!

While you are at it, you may as well pin the T table related to the User
form.

cheers, Guillaume



________________________________

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] on behalf of Joe Martin D'Souza
[jdso...@shyle.net]

Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 12:33 PM


To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Performance question CTM:People timing

 

** 

 

Yes I agree you would want to avoid pinning a table to memory whose
contents are changed continuously by way of modifications or additions..
This would result in frequent memory writes which would beat the purpose
of why you choose to pin it to memory in the first place.

 

While the CTM:People table is a good candidate as its contents change
less frequently in most standard environments, unless it's a B2C
environment where you maintain your customer base in your CTM:People
form, if the table size is as small as 140K, just optimizing searches on
it is more than enough, and pinning it to memory is an overkill..
Optimizing searches on this table when records are about that much or
even upto half a million, would return the search in less than a
fraction of a second anyways..

 

Joe

 

 

From: Guillaume Rheault <mailto:guilla...@dcshq.com>  

Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 12:15 PM

Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general

To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG 

Subject: Re: Performance question CTM:People timing

 

** 

Joe,

well, I disagree with your rationale... actually because it is not a
large table, you can pin in it memory.
Generally speaking, you only pin into memory look-up tables that are
used heavily, and the people form/table is a good candidate.
You definitely do not want to pin a transactional table (like the
incident form).

Guillaume



________________________________

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] on behalf of Joe Martin D'Souza
[jdso...@shyle.net]
Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2011 2:19 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Performance question CTM:People timing

** 

 

For only 140K records I don't think you need to do anything out of the
ordinary to boost up performance. If your statistics were not updated,
it does make sense as Oracle didn't know it had to use indexes and was
perhaps attempting table scans assuming the table has no records if the
statistics information it had for row count was 0 or thereabouts prior
to updating it..

 

Personally I don't really think you can consider CTM:People with around
140 K records to be a large object. Its big but not that big enough to
be considered to pin to memory..

 

Joe

 

From: John Sundberg <mailto:john.sundb...@kineticdata.com>  

Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2011 1:31 PM

Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general

To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG 

Subject: Re: Performance question CTM:People timing

 

** True... good suggestion. 

 

 

 

 

Fundamentally - I was looking for what is "normal" -- what we were
seeing was what we thought was slow. But - just cause you think
something is slow - does not mean that it is slow. Sometimes -- you have
to look to your neighbors and compare. 

 

 

So - thanks to all that shared their timings and system info.

 

 

 

 

 

-John

 

 

 

On Sep 1, 2011, at 8:30 AM, Guillaume Rheault wrote:


** 

One more way to make things even faster in Oracle is to "pin" the
underlying T table into memory.
Ask the DBA over there to do that

-Guilalume



________________________________

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] on behalf of John Sundberg
[john.sundb...@kineticdata.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2011 7:25 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Performance question CTM:People timing

ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ 

_attend WWRUG11 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ 




-- 
Patrick Zandi
_attend WWRUG11 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ 

</pre><font face="monospace"size="-3"><br>The information transmitted is 
intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and <br>may 
contain confidential and/or privileged material.  If the reader of this message 
is not the intended<br>recipient, you are hereby notified that your access is 
unauthorized, and any review, dissemination,<br>distribution or copying of this 
message including any attachments is strictly prohibited.   If you are 
not<br>the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete the 
material from any computer.<br><pre>

_______________________________________________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"

Reply via email to