RE: db block Size for Indexes Tablespaces in 9.2 ?

Hi Jonathan Would like to have Tests done for BOTH Small Big DB_BLOCK_SIZE , if possible , as mentioned below Thanks -Original Message- Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 4:50 PM To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L I think there are too many generic arguments available for

Re: db block Size for Indexes Tablespaces in 9.2 ?

Sorry, It was a rhetorical question. Detailed results come under the heading of company confidential - generic results come under the heading of repetition. You just have to list the set of point (see my earlier point) about why smaller or larger blocks MIGHT make a difference that you could

RE: db block Size for Indexes Tablespaces in 9.2 ?

And just to add my bit...the possible performance gains with various blocksizes under various conditions all assume that your underlying OS layer provides good support for what you want to do. Whilst hardly being definitive, I remember (a few years ago now) a few colleagues of mine had access to

RE: db block Size for Indexes Tablespaces in 9.2 ?

Title: RE: db block Size for Indexes Tablespaces in 9.2 ? Tim, it is no rant at all, at-least folks like (yours truly) can learn different aspects that must be considered in tuning. Thanks Raj __ Rajendra Jamadagni MIS, ESPN Inc

Re: db block Size for Indexes Tablespaces in 9.2 ?

Please pardon the forthcoming rant... RANT Block size is one of the last things to consider in tuning indexes. Yes, it's a knob that can be twiddled, but it should be one of those out-of-the-way knobs that hardly ever get touched. It's much the same as adjusting DB_BLOCK_BUFFERS in order to

Re: db block Size for Indexes Tablespaces in 9.2 ?

I think there are too many generic arguments available for picking the 'right' block size for your indexes. The one that is most appropriate is likely to depend on the nature of the activity (load vs. query), nature of the index (unique, nearly unique, far from unique), data clustering, order of

RE: db block Size for Indexes Tablespaces in 9.2 ?

Title: RE: db block Size for Indexes Tablespaces in 9.2 ? We use 8k for data and 8k for indexes in our OLTP system ... Raj __ Rajendra Jamadagni MIS, ESPN Inc. Rajendra dot Jamadagni at ESPN dot com Any opinion expressed here is personal

Re: db block Size for Indexes Tablespaces in 9.2 ?

nathan Lewis" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: "Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 6:19 AM Subject: Re: db block Size for Indexes Tablespaces in 9.2 ? I think there are too many generic arguments available for picking the 'right' blo

db block Size for Indexes Tablespaces in 9.2 ?

What is the Best Practice for DB_BLOCK_SIZE for Index Tablespaces Undergoing High Volume of Insert , Update , Selects ? Why ? Any Docs , Links for the Same ? NOTE - This is for a Hybrid Application Benchmark undergoing 2000 Banking Transactions per second approx. OLTP Transaction sample =

RE: db block Size for Indexes Tablespaces in 9.2 ?

Title: RE: db block Size for Indexes Tablespaces in 9.2 ? Can you specify db_block_sizes at the tablespace level in 9? *blink* -Original Message- From: VIVEK_SHARMA [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 8:29 AM To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L

Re: db block Size for Indexes Tablespaces in 9.2 ?

I can't point to a paper or article on that, but based on tests I have done, the block size of index tablespaces for a high volume transaction system should be lower than the table block sizes. 2000 tps with 25 changes each does not sound like a really huge transaction rate. You could set the

RE: db block Size for Indexes Tablespaces in 9.2 ?

Hi Arup , List Your point is Correct about High buffer busy wait Contention During Large OLTP Insert /Updates. High buffer busy wait on Corresponding INDEX during INSERT Operations was Observed during our previous benchmark which overcame by Converting to REVERSE Index as the Field Value was