We were asked, not too long ago, to create one Oracle8i database with only *one* table with some 700+ columns. While at it, the consultant (hired by end user dept) also suggested that we make it an IOT using an LMT, and since the table will never grow over 1GB, asked if there was a way to put it in KEEP buffer pool. He was helping re-write/enhance some MS Access Apps.
Talk about knowing all the right lingo... ;) - Kirti -----Original Message----- Sent: Friday, October 11, 2002 8:59 AM To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L April, What can I say? Ouch! I feel your pain. I've been trapped in some pretty ridiculous situations too. (Though, I think you have me beat! A 37 column primary key?? Really??) Well, you at least seem to have the proper attitude. ;-) Without a sense of humor, I'm afraid you'd go insane in short order! ;-) The only other thing I can think of when people shut you down like that is: document. "At meeting X, on such and such a date, I identified this problem, and Mr. Z told me to not to worry about it." It may not help, but from a sanity point of view, there is a certain amount of satisfaction in "I told you so!", even if you never verbalize it....;-) Hang in there, -Mark On Fri, 2002-10-11 at 08:43, April Wells wrote: > Mark... > > If this were the MOST serious design flaw in the whole mess, I wouldn't care > so much. There is a point where you just shut up (gee, I have been TOLD to > do that in meetings) and wait till it breaks (or worse, one of our clients > buys it and we have to TRY to implement). I am the funny one... the one to > laugh at and make fun of because I keep trying to tell them that you can't > do things. You can't have a totally denormalized Oracle table if there 1500 > columns in it... yes queries will fly on a table that can't be built. You > can't have 37 columns in a primary key. Date really isn't an acceptable > name for a column. > > April Wells > Oracle DBA > Keep yourself well oiled with life, laughter, new ideas and action. > Otherwise you will rust out. _Anonymous > > > -----Original Message----- > Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2002 7:34 PM > To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L > > > Hi Dick, > > I have to disagree with you here. Particularly in the case where this > sequence will see any sort of concurrency, from multiple concurrent > sessions accessing it. This is due to the serialization on the SQ > enqueue. This will cause far worse scalability issues than any I/O. > Not that I/O is insignificant, but in this situation, serialization on > the enqueue will be the real showstopper for scalability. > > As to losing the cached values, well, so what? If your design is such > that it's important to have an unbroken contiguous sequence of numbers > with no gaps, then I would argue that is a serious design flaw. Also, > if that's your requirement, then a sequence is not appropriate, since it > can and will end up causing gaps, the first time you roll back a > transaction. > > Finally, as to sequences losing cached values, unless your instance > crashes or does a shutdown abort, Oracle should not loose any sequence > values. > > -Mark > > > > On Thu, 2002-10-10 at 18:18, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Actually there is no IO penalty since Oracle has to treat the sequence > just like > > any table with the old LRU algorithm. I have several sequences with a > cache of > > 0 and they perform as well as those with a cache value. The big > difference is > > when you shut down the database and all of those cached values end up in > the > > trash. > > > > Dick Goulet > > > > ____________________Reply Separator____________________ > > Author: "Yechiel Adar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Date: 10/10/2002 1:38 PM > > > > I think that you will have an update to the sequence number EVERY time > instead > > of every 20 times. That's mean I/o for every nextval. > > > > Yechiel Adar > > Mehish > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Tim Gorman > > To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L > > Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2002 7:43 PM > > Subject: Re: sequence numbers > > > > > > CACHE 20 is the default, so if you remove the clause, it will have > absolutely > > no impact on performance or anything else... > > > > ...of course, I get the feeling that that wasn't the gist of your > question, > > was it? > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: April Wells > > To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L > > Sent: Wednesday, October 09, 2002 8:54 AM > > Subject: sequence numbers > > > > > > I have been given create scripts for sequences to be used in tables > that > > will be loaded via bulk loads. How huge is the potential performance hit > if I > > take out the cache 20? > > > > April Wells > > Oracle DBA > > There is neither good nor bad, but thinking makes it so. -Shakespeare > > > > > > <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> > > <HTML><HEAD> > > <META content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv=Content-Type> > > <META content="MSHTML 5.00.2314.1000" name=GENERATOR> > > <STYLE></STYLE> > > </HEAD> > > <BODY bgColor=#ffffff > > style="FONT: 10pt Times New Roman; MARGIN-LEFT: 2px; MARGIN-TOP: 2px"> > > <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=3>I think that you will have an update to the > > sequence number EVERY time instead of every 20 times. That's mean I/o for > every > > nextval.</FONT></DIV> > > <DIV> </DIV> > > <DIV>Yechiel Adar<BR>Mehish</DIV> > > <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr > > style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: > 0px; > > PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px"> > > <DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV> > > <DIV > > style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: > black"><B>From:</B> > > <A href="mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]"; [EMAIL PROTECTED]>Tim > Gorman</A> > > </DIV> > > <DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A > href="mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]"; > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]>Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L</A> > </DIV> > > <DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, October 10, 2002 > 7:43 > > PM</DIV> > > <DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: sequence numbers</DIV> > > <DIV><BR></DIV> > > <DIV><FONT face=Arial>CACHE 20 is the default, so if you remove the > clause, it > > > > will have absolutely no impact on performance or anything > else...</FONT></DIV> > > <DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV> > > <DIV><FONT face=Arial>...of course, I get the feeling that that wasn't > the > > gist of your question, was it?</FONT></DIV> > > <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr > > style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: > 0px; > > PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px"> > > <DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV> > > <DIV > > style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: > > black"><B>From:</B> > > <A href="mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]"; [EMAIL PROTECTED]>April > Wells</A> > > </DIV> > > <DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A > > href="mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]"; [EMAIL PROTECTED]>Multiple > > > recipients of list ORACLE-L</A> </DIV> > > <DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, October 09, 2002 > 8:54 > > AM</DIV> > > <DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> sequence numbers</DIV> > > <DIV><BR></DIV> > > <DIV><SPAN class=841194713-09102002>I have been given create scripts > for > > sequences to be used in tables that will be loaded via bulk > loads. How > > > > huge is the potential performance hit if I take out the cache > > 20?</SPAN></DIV> > > <DIV> </DIV> > > <P><FONT face="Courier New">April Wells</FONT> <BR><FONT > > face="Courier New">Oracle DBA </FONT><BR><SPAN > > class=841194713-09102002><FONT face="Courier New">T<SPAN > > class=841194713-09102002>here is neither good nor bad, but thinking > makes it > > > > so. > > > -Shakespeare</SPAN></FONT></SPAN></P></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML > > > > -- -- Mark J. Bobak Oracle DBA [EMAIL PROTECTED] "It is not enough to have a good mind. The main thing is to use it well." -- Rene Descartes -- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com -- Author: Mark J. Bobak INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fat City Network Services -- 858-538-5051 http://www.fatcity.com San Diego, California -- Mailing list and web hosting services --------------------------------------------------------------------- To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing). -- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com -- Author: Deshpande, Kirti INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fat City Network Services -- 858-538-5051 http://www.fatcity.com San Diego, California -- Mailing list and web hosting services --------------------------------------------------------------------- To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).
