John R Pierce wrote: > Morten Torstensen wrote: >> John R Pierce wrote: >>> certainly are. The database adminstrators will spend hours pouring >>> over IO logs and database statistics in order to better optimize the >>> distribution of tables and indicies across the available tablespaces. >> >> Didn't realise Oracle was that primitive. One should just balance all >> the tablespaces out over multiple volumes and or controllers and add >> table partitioning as needed. Transaction filesystem is a striped >> filesystem over the same raid/volumes. >> >> Then if you need more I/O bandwidth you just add more controllers and >> disks. > > thats the shotgun approach, yes. > in our case, our production systems are a very large very complex > realtime oracle database running on large scale Sun enterprise hardware > on bigiron EMC storage, using dozens and dozens of raid10 logical > volumes as you do NOT want to have a single 10TB volume, sorry. by > hand optimizing the tablespace layouts of the applications tables and > indicies, which have very specific access patterns, we can get double > the throughput of the blind 'just stripe the universe' approach. Since > we're dealing with $millions worth of servers here at each production > factory, tossing more iron at the problem isn't always the best > solution. btw, we've found Oracle 10's new 'self optimizer' to do a > far worse job of query optimization than what we have been able to hand > tune out of Oracle 9, so we're not upgrading until this changes. > > we're embarking on a pilot project to evaluate a smaller scale version > of this manufacturing execution system on linux + postgres as there are > smaller installations which can't justify the costs of Oracle. > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS at centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > Just out of curiosity John, are you allowed to give us some hints about what your system does? If you are posting on the CentOS list i presume you are running CentOS, rather than "a similar upstream product". Also I'd love to know what you mean by "you do NOT want to have a single 10TB volume" - are you referring to performance or single-point-of-failure issues? Regards, MrKiwi