Good stuff. Plus, watch this:
If saving dozens of hours of labor cost actually does cost a full 5% performance penalty on access time, and if reads from disk account for 10% of total response time for a given user action, then saving dozens of hours of labor cost will actually penalize total response time of that user action by only ½ of one percent.
Probably not a bad tradeoff in many situations. The key is to know what your situation is. The way to figure that out? Broken record says:
…extended SQL trace data (10046 level 8 or 12).
Cary Millsap -----Original Message-----
Maybe we have been lucky. But we use the SAME methodology. We have removed a considerable amount of "human effort" in regards to layout of datafiles and disk layout. And based on the stats that I have seen from the Storage team/SA's, we have *maybe* seen a 2-5% performance hit in access time. That info needs to be confirmed-but the disk technology has been improved so dramatically-that older "rules of thumb" aren't necessary for *specific* environments. There is still logical separation of tables/indexes as mentioned below.. But we typically present a single file system for the datafiles.... Does this work in all cases for us - nope! But it covers a majority of the environments and we address the *unique* environments accordingly. But considering the number of databases and the volume of disk space - more effective for us.
just a comment:-)
-----Original Message-----
Great responses ! Thanks very much .. -----Original Message----- Hi Gaja, I agree that throughput can always be improved by
adding more drives to So I feel that there's a tradeoff between access time
and throughput. Regards,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-- Fat City Network Services --
858-538-5051 http://www.fatcity.com
-- Fat City Network Services --
858-538-5051 http://www.fatcity.com
|
Title: RE: SAME and separating disk and index tablespaces
- RE: SAME and separating disk and index tablespace... Cary Millsap
- Re: SAME and separating disk and index tablespace... Dave Hau
- RE: SAME and separating disk and index tablespace... vikas kawatra
- Re: SAME and separating disk and index tablespace... Jared . Still
- RE: SAME and separating disk and index tablespace... Hans de Git
- Re: SAME and separating disk and index tablespace... David Hau
- Re: SAME and separating disk and index tablespace... David Hau
- Re: SAME and separating disk and index tablespace... Nuno Souto
- RE: SAME and separating disk and index tablespace... Loughmiller, Greg
- RE: SAME and separating disk and index tablespace... Thater, William
- Re: SAME and separating disk and index tablespace... Cary Millsap
- Re: SAME and separating disk and index tablespace... Gaja Krishna Vaidyanatha
- Re: SAME and separating disk and index tablespace... Paul Drake