f



Raw vs. Cooked

I am the dba for our shop's Informix based app.  We use raw devices on
our Sun Solaris boxes.

We are about ready to start the process of redeveloping our agency's
main app using Oracle.  I am starting to familiarize myself with
Oracle.

I'm wondering about the ole cooked vs. raw space issue.

In my Informix experience, I am quite comfortable using raw space.
However,I have gotten the impression
from Oracle folks (for example, an Oracle instructor) that the
customary practice with Oracle is to use cooked space.  In fact, the
instructor said there wouldn't be any difference, so he suggested using
"the more
convenient" cooked space.  To me, it doesn't really seem inconvenient
to
use raw, so I would be happy to go that way if there is a performance
gain (which seems likely to me).  I am assuming that there  exist
Oracle utilities to
handle backups or loading/unloading raw storage.

Anyway, while considering this, I found a recent (April 2004) Oracle
white paper that
seems to support my personal bias (don't we just love to see our
prejudices reinforced?).  It is called "A Quantitative Comparison
Between Raw Devices and File Systems for Implementing Oracle
Databases".  It can be found here:

http://www.oracle.com/technology/deploy/performance/pdf/TWP_Oracle_HP_files.pdf

It concludes that using raw devices is much superior to cooked.  But,
perhaps that conclusion is meant to apply specifically to HP platforms,
since that was the basis of the paper.

Anyway, among the Oracle cogniscenti, is raw really generally avoided
in favor of cooked?  Does this paper challenge the generally accepted
Oracle practice?  Is there a generally accepted "factoid" in the Oracle
world that either raw or cooked is "the way to go"?

We will be using one big S.A.M.E. RAID10 device.  The question is to
cook or not to cook, and administrative difficulties of raw vs cooked
are not an issue (assuming suitable Oracle tools exist).
Thank you for any comments.

0
12/16/2004 8:48:39 PM
comp.databases.oracle.server 22978 articles. 1 followers. Post Follow

11 Replies
501 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 14

IMO stick with raw partitions over file systems.

Steve Adams, who has published a book on Oracle internal structure and
behavior, has written on this subject.  You can find it on his web
site: http://www.ixora.com.au

HTH -- Mark D Powell --

0
Mark.Powell (1630)
12/16/2004 10:32:17 PM
"Mark D Powell" <Mark.Powell@eds.com> wrote in message 
news:1103236337.881584.144870@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> IMO stick with raw partitions over file systems.
>
> Steve Adams, who has published a book on Oracle internal structure and
> behavior, has written on this subject.  You can find it on his web
> site: http://www.ixora.com.au
>
> HTH -- Mark D Powell --
>


why, with todays modern cache's on big systerms, raw has no real benefit - 
whats your experience? 


0
Dave
12/17/2004 1:33:39 AM
Hello All

I read the referenced article with interest as the database I am
responsible for is hosted on an HP-UX 11i server and is raw-device
based (the decision to use raw was before my time). However we are not
using the async IO driver. This is where my question comes in. The
paper concludes that:

"Where ease of management is not an issue and there is no application
constraint, customers should always implement raw based database with
async IO on HP-UX"

However, my reading of the evidence suggests to me that where ease of
management is not an issue and there is no application constraint,
customers should consider raw based database with async IO on HP-UX if
the application is primarily write intensive. I notice that:

=====================================
Filesystem with optimal mount options

DB_FILE_SEQUENTIAL_READ 14ms medium load and 19ms heavy load

Raw-device and no async IO driver

DB_FILE_SEQUENTIAL_READ 9ms medium load and 19ms heavy load

Raw-device and async IO driver

DB_FILE_SEQUENTIAL_READ 12ms medium load and 26ms heavy load
=====================================

Read operations are the bottleneck in our database. I have never
encountered a performance problem where write performance is the
bottleneck. I have, on the other hand, encountered a number of
performance problems where db_file_sequential_read was the primary
response time component. This leads me to conclude that by not enabling
the async IO driver I am on the write track. Am I missing something
important here, or do others agree with my conclusions?
Any advice appreciated

Thanks

Austin

0
12/17/2004 11:09:21 AM
Austin, a db_file_sequential_read, is a randon read.  The statistic
name is based on how Oracle stored the read data block into the buffer
cache not on how the IO is performed.

See http://www.lazydba.com/oracle/0__56581.html for backup to my point.

I have never seen proof that any other form of IO can equal Async IO
when the test is exaimined closely for the details of how it was ran.
HTH -- Mark D Powell --

0
Mark.Powell (1630)
12/17/2004 2:49:20 PM
Even with a large buffer cache RAW partitions outperform traditional
file IO and it is highly likely that the database will still perform
significant amount of physical IO operations so speed of the IO still
counts.

We have used both UNIX files systems and raw partitons to support our
databases.  When we converted any of the databases using file systems
to raw partitions there was always a small overall performance gain.
Generally most sites will probably not see a big change, but if IO is a
bottleneck then even a small gain can be very significant to end-user
happiness.

Depending on version and platform there are many different forms of IO.
Ahmed Alomari in his book, Oracle & UNIX Performance Tuning, Prentice
Hall, discusses several of them by platform.  My copy is from 1997, but
if a newer version exists it may be worthwhile for anyone with physical
IO performance issues to try to obtain this book.
HTH -- Mark D Powell --

0
Mark.Powell (1630)
12/17/2004 3:01:46 PM
That's an interesting article - the most interesting
point of all being that the database was 235GB,
spread over 180 discs.

I think one of the problems with the question:
"Is raw better than cooked ?" is that the question
is rarely phrased in the best way.  Try restating
it more like:

    I have 500 MB available RAM, should I set this up as
        500 MB db_cache_size and use RAW
        400 MB db_cache_size, 100MB file system buffer and use file system
        480 MB db_cache_size, 20 MB async_io buffer and use async I/O

(adjust according to your feature set and memory availability).
The answer then depends on how well your application
is written, and who else is hammering the disks.

If you have a really good application, and no-one else
is killing the discs, then raw devices should be faster
because (a) they avoid the double-buffering and inode
locking issues that the paper mentions and (b) you have
put all the memory into the Oracle buffer - which is where
the smart code is that really understands which bits of
data are most popular and should be kept longest.

If you have a badly written application, particularly
one that does repeated, tablescans (most specifically
one that are too small to be really noticeable, but too
large to be handled extremely well by Oracle) then
a file system buffer can save you - because the file
system buffer may hand on to file system blocks that
Oracle keeps discarding from its LRU list.

If you have a reasonable application, but other people
are killing the discs, every write that you do could be
slowed down to a random degree because of someone
else. In which case async I/O may be your best friend
for smoothing out performance peaks.


-- 
Regards

Jonathan Lewis

http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/faq/ind_faq.html
The Co-operative Oracle Users' FAQ

http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/seminar.html
Optimising Oracle Seminar - schedule updated Sept 19th





<david_grove@correct.state.ak.us> wrote in message 
news:1103230119.537094.214900@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>I am the dba for our shop's Informix based app.  We use raw devices on
> our Sun Solaris boxes.
>
> We are about ready to start the process of redeveloping our agency's
> main app using Oracle.  I am starting to familiarize myself with
> Oracle.
>
> I'm wondering about the ole cooked vs. raw space issue.
>
> In my Informix experience, I am quite comfortable using raw space.
> However,I have gotten the impression
> from Oracle folks (for example, an Oracle instructor) that the
> customary practice with Oracle is to use cooked space.  In fact, the
> instructor said there wouldn't be any difference, so he suggested using
> "the more
> convenient" cooked space.  To me, it doesn't really seem inconvenient
> to
> use raw, so I would be happy to go that way if there is a performance
> gain (which seems likely to me).  I am assuming that there  exist
> Oracle utilities to
> handle backups or loading/unloading raw storage.
>
> Anyway, while considering this, I found a recent (April 2004) Oracle
> white paper that
> seems to support my personal bias (don't we just love to see our
> prejudices reinforced?).  It is called "A Quantitative Comparison
> Between Raw Devices and File Systems for Implementing Oracle
> Databases".  It can be found here:
>
> http://www.oracle.com/technology/deploy/performance/pdf/TWP_Oracle_HP_files.pdf
>
> It concludes that using raw devices is much superior to cooked.  But,
> perhaps that conclusion is meant to apply specifically to HP platforms,
> since that was the basis of the paper.
>
> Anyway, among the Oracle cogniscenti, is raw really generally avoided
> in favor of cooked?  Does this paper challenge the generally accepted
> Oracle practice?  Is there a generally accepted "factoid" in the Oracle
> world that either raw or cooked is "the way to go"?
>
> We will be using one big S.A.M.E. RAID10 device.  The question is to
> cook or not to cook, and administrative difficulties of raw vs cooked
> are not an issue (assuming suitable Oracle tools exist).
> Thank you for any comments.
> 


0
jonathan5683 (1392)
12/17/2004 4:03:48 PM
Thanks for the inputs.

Mark, that link you sent was interesting.

I believe I'm correct in saying that db_file_sequential_read siginifies
a wait for an IO request to complete. Am I correct, then, in saying
that the increase in db_file_sequential_read is introduced because of
the increased IO throughput you get from async IO. In otherwords, it's
a symptom of IO performance improvements and not degredation?
Thanks

Austin

0
12/17/2004 5:57:11 PM
I think I'll change my mind for our first development install, and use
cooked space.  I'll then study Oracle structure and plan to use raw for
production.  The reason for going with cooked now is that as I started
reading the Oracle Installation Guide, it seemed that, unlike Informix (have
been Informix DBA), I couldn't just make the single equivalent in Oracle
(i.e., a single tablespace) of a single big Informix storage unit (a "whole
enchilada" rootdbs dbspace).  It appeared to me from the Installation Guide
that I needed to create a dozen (raw) tablespaces.

So, until I understand Oracle better, I'll start with cooked, and then
"graduate" to raw, later.

Thank you all for your helpful comments.


DG





<david_grove@correct.state.ak.us> wrote in message
news:1103230119.537094.214900@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> I am the dba for our shop's Informix based app.  We use raw devices on
> our Sun Solaris boxes.
>
> We are about ready to start the process of redeveloping our agency's
> main app using Oracle.  I am starting to familiarize myself with
> Oracle.
>
> I'm wondering about the ole cooked vs. raw space issue.
>
> In my Informix experience, I am quite comfortable using raw space.
> However,I have gotten the impression
> from Oracle folks (for example, an Oracle instructor) that the
> customary practice with Oracle is to use cooked space.  In fact, the
> instructor said there wouldn't be any difference, so he suggested using
> "the more
> convenient" cooked space.  To me, it doesn't really seem inconvenient
> to
> use raw, so I would be happy to go that way if there is a performance
> gain (which seems likely to me).  I am assuming that there  exist
> Oracle utilities to
> handle backups or loading/unloading raw storage.
>
> Anyway, while considering this, I found a recent (April 2004) Oracle
> white paper that
> seems to support my personal bias (don't we just love to see our
> prejudices reinforced?).  It is called "A Quantitative Comparison
> Between Raw Devices and File Systems for Implementing Oracle
> Databases".  It can be found here:
>
>
http://www.oracle.com/technology/deploy/performance/pdf/TWP_Oracle_HP_files.pdf
>
> It concludes that using raw devices is much superior to cooked.  But,
> perhaps that conclusion is meant to apply specifically to HP platforms,
> since that was the basis of the paper.
>
> Anyway, among the Oracle cogniscenti, is raw really generally avoided
> in favor of cooked?  Does this paper challenge the generally accepted
> Oracle practice?  Is there a generally accepted "factoid" in the Oracle
> world that either raw or cooked is "the way to go"?
>
> We will be using one big S.A.M.E. RAID10 device.  The question is to
> cook or not to cook, and administrative difficulties of raw vs cooked
> are not an issue (assuming suitable Oracle tools exist).
> Thank you for any comments.
>


0
12/17/2004 10:56:06 PM
Just a little expansion on the "single large storage unit" (see below)  for
a database.

I did have many physical storage units in our Informix system.  While
familiarizing myself with Oracle, I found the Oracle SAME paper.  I  tried
it (a single big RAID10 physical storage allocation) with our Informix
database on one of our new Sun boxes.  Now I have a bunch of things
contributing to the results (new box, new configuration, new RAID, and the
new storage structure), but the results were fantastic.  I have become a fan
of SAME.

Someday, when I have spare time and am looking for pain, I might actually
try to set up the traditional many dbspaces/tablespaces thing, and agonize
over what to place where.  But, in the meantime, SAME is great, and I'll try
it on our new Oracle system, too.

DG




"David E. Grove" <david_grove@correct.state.ak.us> wrote in message
news:10s6p0i7tal4q44@corp.supernews.com...
>
> I think I'll change my mind for our first development install, and use
> cooked space.  I'll then study Oracle structure and plan to use raw for
> production.  The reason for going with cooked now is that as I started
> reading the Oracle Installation Guide, it seemed that, unlike Informix
(have
> been Informix DBA), I couldn't just make the single equivalent in Oracle
> (i.e., a single tablespace) of a single big Informix storage unit (a
"whole
> enchilada" rootdbs dbspace).  It appeared to me from the Installation
Guide
> that I needed to create a dozen (raw) tablespaces.
>
> So, until I understand Oracle better, I'll start with cooked, and then
> "graduate" to raw, later.
>
> Thank you all for your helpful comments.
>
>
> DG
>
>
>
>
>
> <david_grove@correct.state.ak.us> wrote in message
> news:1103230119.537094.214900@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> > I am the dba for our shop's Informix based app.  We use raw devices on
> > our Sun Solaris boxes.
> >
> > We are about ready to start the process of redeveloping our agency's
> > main app using Oracle.  I am starting to familiarize myself with
> > Oracle.
> >
> > I'm wondering about the ole cooked vs. raw space issue.
> >
> > In my Informix experience, I am quite comfortable using raw space.
> > However,I have gotten the impression
> > from Oracle folks (for example, an Oracle instructor) that the
> > customary practice with Oracle is to use cooked space.  In fact, the
> > instructor said there wouldn't be any difference, so he suggested using
> > "the more
> > convenient" cooked space.  To me, it doesn't really seem inconvenient
> > to
> > use raw, so I would be happy to go that way if there is a performance
> > gain (which seems likely to me).  I am assuming that there  exist
> > Oracle utilities to
> > handle backups or loading/unloading raw storage.
> >
> > Anyway, while considering this, I found a recent (April 2004) Oracle
> > white paper that
> > seems to support my personal bias (don't we just love to see our
> > prejudices reinforced?).  It is called "A Quantitative Comparison
> > Between Raw Devices and File Systems for Implementing Oracle
> > Databases".  It can be found here:
> >
> >
>
http://www.oracle.com/technology/deploy/performance/pdf/TWP_Oracle_HP_files.pdf
> >
> > It concludes that using raw devices is much superior to cooked.  But,
> > perhaps that conclusion is meant to apply specifically to HP platforms,
> > since that was the basis of the paper.
> >
> > Anyway, among the Oracle cogniscenti, is raw really generally avoided
> > in favor of cooked?  Does this paper challenge the generally accepted
> > Oracle practice?  Is there a generally accepted "factoid" in the Oracle
> > world that either raw or cooked is "the way to go"?
> >
> > We will be using one big S.A.M.E. RAID10 device.  The question is to
> > cook or not to cook, and administrative difficulties of raw vs cooked
> > are not an issue (assuming suitable Oracle tools exist).
> > Thank you for any comments.
> >
>
>


0
12/17/2004 11:48:04 PM
db_file_sequential_read is a count of random (single block) IO
requests.  Most indexed access falls into this category: get a branch
block, get a leaf block, get the table block.  When used in conjuction
with the other IO statistics it helps you determine the distribution of
your Oracle IO by type: full table scan verse indexed, number of IO
expended on sort operations, etc....

When the statistic is used at the session level it can help you
determine if a plan is efficient.  That is you can estimate the number
of IO operations a task should take and then compare the statistics to
the estimate.

HTH -- Mark D Powell --

0
Mark.Powell (1630)
12/19/2004 4:42:20 AM
Hello Mark

Thanks again for your input.

I do realise that db_file_sequential_read signifies a wait for a single
block IO and when this event represents a large proportion of a query's
resource profile the most appropriate action is to reduce the number of
database calls (e.g. logical IOs). Only when the number of LIOs
required has been truly reduced to a minimum should we consider making
changes to the IO subsystem if a performance problem still exists.

Where my confusion comes in is that the optimal configuration in the
paper also exhibits the longest db_file_sequential_read durations. This
despite the SQL that is being executed during the test being identical
the SQL executed when testing the non-optimal configurations. This has
led me to think that the increased throughput afforded by async IO has
led to busier disks and longer db_file_sequential_read durations. Do
you think this assumption is reasonable?

0
12/20/2004 9:37:39 AM
Reply:

Similar Artilces:

converting from "cooked" to "raw" oracle database
i'm working on a database which consists of datafiles in filesystems (referred to as cooked in some technical documents). i want to look at the performance difference with all the files raw i.e. using logical volumes to store the data. i know its possible to backup raw files using the dd command. what i'm interested in finding out/understanding is how to perform the opposite process i.e. convert from a 'cooked' to 'raw' storage system for an existing instance containing data. can i use a dd command to copy data from file to logical volume? is an export/import the only option? i'm going to be performing a number of tests myself and will post findings here. any other knowledge on subject appreciated. stre...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: > i'm working on a database which consists of datafiles in filesystems > (referred to as cooked in some technical documents). i want to look at > the performance difference with all the files raw i.e. using logical > volumes to store the data. i know its possible to backup raw files > using the dd command. what i'm interested in finding out/understanding > is how to perform the opposite process i.e. convert from a 'cooked' to > 'raw' storage system for an existing instance containing data. can i > use a dd command to copy data from file to logical volume? is an > export/import the only option? i'm going to be performing a number of > tests myself and will post finding...

SN#22938 Oracle Database 11g vs. Microsoft SQL Server 2008
SYSTEM NEWS FOR SUN USERS Vol 145 Issue 5 2010-04-01 Article 22938 from section "Oracle" An Edison Group Comparative Management Costs Study An Edison Group report offers a comparative management costs study revealing how the Oracle Database widens the manageability lead over Microsoft SQL Server 2008. The study shows how Oracle Database 11g can save 43% in time and 41% in database management costs over Microsoft SQL Server 2008. Details at http://sun.systemnews.com/g?A=22938 Have a custom version of 'System News for Sun Users&#...

moving oracle database server into a new server
Hi all I will be moving oracle from one Solaris server into another Solaris server, the IP address and box name will be changed. Oracle version is 8.1.7 and O/S is 5.8 on both servers ( just different O/S patch). Does any one know what I need to do in order to get oracle up and running again on the new server. I know that I will need to change the tnsnames.ora and listner.ora, but is there anything else that I need to do? Thanks Teresa Teresa wrote: > Hi all > > I will be moving oracle from one Solaris server into another Solaris > server, the IP address and box name will be changed. Oracle version is > 8.1.7 and O/S is 5.8 on both servers ( just different O/S patch). > Does any one know what I need to do in order to get oracle up and > running again on the new server. I know that I will need to change the > tnsnames.ora and listner.ora, but is there anything else that I need > to do? > > Thanks > Teresa When I do this with windows boxes I either: #1 Install oracle on the new box, create a new database and export/import from old db to new db #2 Copy datafiles, init, sqlnet, tns.. etc over from coldbackup or shutdown old_database, startup nomount and recreate the controlfile to fit new environment. #3 Restore from online backup of old_database and apply redo logs, again recreating the controlfile to fit the new env. (I usually only do this for "practice" and for creating a development copy of a prod db) #2 ...

Oracle 9i Database Server on Windows 2003 Server
I am wondering if we can install this Server on Windows 2003 Server without any problems. Is there anybody that did that before? Thanks in advance if someone know the answer. Yvon Bouchard, B. Sc. Computer Science Teacher http://info.cegepat.qc.ca/siteyvon I've installed it on windows 2003 enterprise ed. about 1 month ago without any problem. I've installed the version 9.2.0.1 with the patch to 9.2.0.3. 9.2.0.3 is the only version certified by oracle for win 2003. Ciao "Yvon Bouchard" <yvon.bouchard@cablevision.qc.ca> ha scritto nel messaggio news:QCLvb.21605$ZF1.2102185@news20.bellglobal.com... > I am wondering if we can install this Server on Windows 2003 Server without > any problems. > Is there anybody that did that before? > Thanks in advance if someone know the answer. > > Yvon Bouchard, B. Sc. Computer Science > Teacher > http://info.cegepat.qc.ca/siteyvon > > > Yvon Bouchard wrote: > > I am wondering if we can install this Server on Windows 2003 Server without > any problems. > Is there anybody that did that before? > Thanks in advance if someone know the answer. > Although I have not installed on Windows 2003 myself, I know of several such installations and all occurred without issue. I do note that Oracle has a separate download (CD set) for the WIndows 2003 compared to NT/2000/XP, so I suspect the install for the latter may not be ...

How do I check which Oracle Patches are appplied to an Oracle DataBase Server
I would like to know if someone could help me with this topic, I'm traying to analize and chek which Oracle Patches are appplied to an Oracle DataBase Server >chek which Oracle Patches are appplied to an Oracle DataBase Server If they were applied with oPatch, then "opatch lsinventory" should show you what's there. If you did not use oPatch, then I have no clue. ;-) BD wrote: > >chek which Oracle Patches are appplied to an Oracle DataBase Server > > If they were applied with oPatch, then "opatch lsinventory" should show > you what's there. > > If you did not use oPatch, then I have no clue. ;-) For better or worse ( we know the answer ) opatch is the tool that install patches from oracle support. "If you did not use oPatch" ... what? >"If you did not use oPatch" ... what? In my 8i environments, there are separate scripts that are run - for example, for a cpu, it would be 'install_cpu.sh'. In those cases, I really don't know how (if) one can confirm which patches have been applied to an environment. ...

Oracle Application Server vs. Apache+Tomcat vs.built-in Java
Hello I was requested to install and maintain OAS in order to enable an environment for Web based database applications using Java technology, mostly Applets, and perhaps Servlets. I am convinced that the developers do not really need such a big animal, but I can't mention the reasons. Shouldn't Apache+Tomcat be enough? Which would be the conceptual disadvantages of this simpler solution then? I am not specially aware of the extra functionality offered by the OAS beyond the Servlet capability, but some could exist which could be raised by the developers as an unconditional argument to support the use of the OAS. I need the contra-arguments. I try not to use tools that are more complicated that needed. In my opinion, if no other Oracle tools are being used, then there is no real need for OAS. Well, at least if you are not going to deal with hundreds of users of your Internet Application spread all over the world. The application itself should fulfill high security standards, but is comparably small, does not use distributed components, does not need any interaction with other applications. In one word, is has a simple architecture. By the way, isn't Oracle itself able to run Java? So why should one need anything else (besides Apache itself) at all? (I mean, not even Tomcat should be needed then). Any comments before I dive into the lengthy OAS documentation? (at this time, I only need some general orientation). Thanks a lot!...

Oracle databases on a server
I have Oracle installation on a SUN UNIX server. I tappears that it is running Oracle 10.2 and Solaris 8. I want to find out how many databases are installed on this server. Would it be true to say that all databases installed on this server are listed in tnsnames.ora where the 'HOST' entry points to this server? On Feb 20, 9:00=A0am, p...@qantas.com.au wrote: > I have Oracle installation on a SUN UNIX server. I tappears that it is > running Oracle 10.2 and Solaris 8. > > I want to find out how many databases are installed on this server. > > Would it be true to say that all databases installed on this server > are listed in tnsnames.ora where the 'HOST' entry points to this > server? No, these might be different *services* served by the same instance. The first place to look at is /var/opt/oracle/oratab file, which should list all Oracle instances on your host. If your Oracle installation follows OFA (Optimal Flexible Architecture,) which is usually true, count $ORACLE_BASE/admin/<dbname> directories - each database should have its own directory under admin. Alternatively, you can also count spfile<SID>.ora files in $ORACLE_HOME/dbs directory. Hth, Vladimir M. Zakharychev N-Networks, makers of Dynamic PSP(tm) http://www.dynamicpsp.com On 20 Feb, 06:00, p...@qantas.com.au wrote: > I have Oracle installation on a SUN UNIX server. I tappears that it is > running Oracle 10.2 and Solaris 8. > > I want...

SqlSpec
Do you wish you had comprehensive, easily navigable documentation for your SQL Server, Oracle, Analysis Server, MySQL, and Access databases? Are you a SQL Developer or DBA that just inherited a huge, complex database with no supporting docs and don't know where to start learning how it's put together? Are you an independent contractor working with SQL Server, Oracle, Analysis Server, MySQL, or Access? Your clients would LOVE you if you could provide comprehensive documentation about the databases you build. Are you a Project Manager who is tired of developers making changes to databases on live servers and not updating the corresponding spec? SqlSpec will make sense of it all and generate easy-to-read docs for you for any database on the following platforms: * SQL Server 2000/2005 * Oracle 9i (and above) * MySQL 5.0 (and above) * Analysis Server 2005 * Access 97/2000/XP/2003 SqlSpec generates documentation in two formats: HTML or CHM. HTML is useful for publishing your documents on the web or an intranet site. CHM is useful if you want a single, compact file containing all your documentation about one or more databases. The CHM is indexed so it is easily searchable for any keyword. This way you can easily determine which objects reference the "EmployeeID" column, for example. You can download a fully featured trial version here: http://www.elsasoft.org ...

automate startup /shutdown oracle database server 9i on redhat advance server 3.0
how i automate the oracle database 9i on RedHat Advance server 3.0 automatic startup and shutdown database in linux advance server 3.0 On Mon, 2 Aug 2004 17:06:37 +0500, "Kashif Hameed" <kashifh@shoa.net> wrote: >how i automate the oracle database 9i on RedHat Advance server 3.0 automatic >startup and shutdown database in linux advance server 3.0 > as usual: just read the documentation http://download-uk.oracle.com/docs/pdf/A96167_01.pdf (and please do so prior to posting as to avoid this type of questions) -- Sybrand Bakker, Senior Oracle DBA ...

IDS 10 on RHEL4 Linux: I/O benchmark of RAW DEVICES vs BLOCK DEVICES vs COOKED FILES
Hello there, this is a long message (sorry in advance) which contains some hopefully interesting information. There are also some questions at the end. I have this nice new Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4 machine, it's an HP DL 385 with 8 internal 10K RPM SAS disks, 2 dual-core AMD Opteron CPUs and 4 GB RAM. Machine features 256 Mb of cache on the disks controller. Here it is: http://tinyurl.com/p6k6y I have installed Informix Dynamic Server 10.00.FC4 (64 bit). I bumped into this IBM article: http://tinyurl.com/gfovb, where it says that Informix IDS 10 on RHEL4 Linux is able to access block devices in unbuffered fashion -like it does for the raw devices- using KAIO (Kernel Asynchronous I/O). The server is brand new, and I can play with it a bit before it goes into production, so I decided to do some performance testing of RAW vs BLOCK vs COOKED, to see which one was better from the I/O performance point of view. Some definitions, first: * RAW DEVICE or CHARACTER DEVICE = devices through which data is transmitted one character at a time, using unbuffered input and output routines; each character is read from, or written to, the device immediately; such devices are disk partitions without a file system on them, and are therefore managed from outside the operating system using direct access and bypassing the OS layer and its cache * BLOCK DEVICE = devices through which data is transmitted in the form of blocks, the most sign...

TOAD vs. SQL Developer vs. what / Using TOAD 7.x against Oracle 10g server and an 11g client
Here's my dilemma: * Love TOAD. Been using TOAD 7.x. Recently upgraded to 10g servers with 11g clients and TOAD no longer works. The latest TOAD will work (9.x), but our budget got slashed so no purchase. * Been using Oracle's SQL Developer as a TOAD replacement. Love that Oracle's finally made a TOAD-like, free product. And I'm truly grateful it's in development. But I hate that it's a bit buggy (I have to shuffle between versions 1.5.1, 1.5.3, and 1.5.4 to get things done), that it takes a long time to launch (TOAD was faster), that it has no Load / Save ...

it's compatible oracle 8i client, compatible whith oracle 9i server (or oracle 10g server)
Hi all, I have a client/server application that work on the client with oracle 8i client connected to oracle 8i server, Im going to upgrade the server to oracle 9i (or oracle10g) , and I wonder if the client will work fine without upgrade version. Thanks Angel R. wrote: > Hi all, > I have a client/server application that work on the client with oracle 8i > client connected to > oracle 8i server, Im going to upgrade the server to oracle 9i (or oracle10g) > , and > I wonder if the client will work fine without upgrade version. > > Thanks If you have access to the metalink then check the connect matrix at http://metalink.oracle.com/metalink/plsql/showdoc?db=NOT&id=207303.1 Regards /Rauf ...

Oracle vs SQL Server
We are currently evaluating Honeywell's Optivision software. This database options that we are looking at are Oracle and MS SQL Server. I looking for documentation or real world examples - why Oracle is better than SQL Server. I just cannot see going with a large installation of a Microsoft product. Thanks, Andy On Wed, 15 Apr 2009 12:29:03 -0700 (PDT), andy <abent@aetinc.com> wrote: >We are currently evaluating Honeywell's Optivision software. This >database options that we are looking at are Oracle and MS SQL Server. > >I looking for documentation or real world examples - why Oracle is >better than SQL Server. I just cannot see going with a large >installation of a Microsoft product. > >Thanks, >Andy The best feature comparison is at http://www.psoug.org/reference/OLD/sqlserver.html If Optivision was developed for SQLserver and has been 'ported' 1 on 1 to Oracle, it will almost 100 percent certain perform badly, as the architecture of both databases is fundamentally different. In that case you shouldn't consider using Oracle, or you must want to make the life of an Oracle DBA miserable. Regards, -- Sybrand Bakker Senior Oracle DBA On Apr 15, 12:29=A0pm, andy <ab...@aetinc.com> wrote: > We are currently evaluating Honeywell's Optivision software. =A0This > database options that we are looking at are Oracle and MS SQL Server. > > I looking for documentation or real world examples - why ...

Question on Oracle Server 10g Install (.../oracle/oracle/.....
I am in the last stages of installing Oracle Server 10gR2 Enterprise Edition on a UNIX AIX server. When window "Execute Configuration Scripts" comes up it tells me to execute "/u01/app/oracle/oracle/product/10.2.0/db_1/root.sh". The ".../oracle/oracle/..." stops me cold. I look back in my notes and everything I wrote suggests I had entered ".../oracle/product/....." for my ORACLE_HOME. I look at the install log in /u01/app/oracle/oraInventory/logs and see: "INFO: Setting variable 'ORACLE_HOME' to '/u01/app/oracle/oracle/product/10.2.0/d b_1'. Received the value from the command line." Did I really key /oracle/oracle/ instead of /oracle/ or did the OUI change the path for some reason????? Thank you, Bill bfogarty@gaports.com wrote: > I am in the last stages of installing Oracle Server 10gR2 Enterprise > Edition on a UNIX AIX server. When window "Execute Configuration > Scripts" comes up it tells me to execute > "/u01/app/oracle/oracle/product/10.2.0/db_1/root.sh". > > The ".../oracle/oracle/..." stops me cold. I look back in my notes and > everything I wrote suggests I had entered ".../oracle/product/....." > for my ORACLE_HOME. I look at the install log in > /u01/app/oracle/oraInventory/logs and see: > "INFO: Setting variable 'ORACLE_HOME' to > '/u01/app/oracle/oracle/product/10.2.0/d > b_1'. Received the valu...

Oracle on H85 vs. PC Server
**** Post for FREE via your newsreader at post.usenet.com **** Oracle on H85 vs. PC Server We are using Oracle 9.0.1 with AIX 4.3.3 on a H85. Configured with 2 600M CPU and 2G Mem. 4 36G disk set RAID5 in 7133 SSA. (These disk just for database) After our software developers moved their database from PC Server to H85, we found the performance is very low. I use topas to monitor, it show that disk I/O always >90%, KB_read= 7-8M/s, KB_write=2-4M/s, CPU wio > 40%. One transaction need about 5 sec. I dont know what hell a database they design, the DBA told me why the I/O is so high just be...

databases.oracle.server job link
http://www.jobbankdata.com http://www.jobbankdata.com/index.htm http://www.jobbankdata.com/type-of-jobs.htm http://www.jobbankdata.com/find-job.htm http://www.jobbankdata.com/result.htm http://www.jobbankdata.com/create-app.htm http://www.jobbankdata.com/create-cv.htm http://www.jobbankdata.com/interview.htm http://www.jobbankdata.com/site.htm On Mar 12, 10:29 am, "good_online_jobs" <good_online_j...@yahoo.com> wrote: > http://www.jobbankdata.comhttp://www.jobbankdata.com/index.htmhttp://www.jobbankdata.com/type-of-jobs.htmhttp://www.jobbankdata.com/find-job.htmhttp://www.jobbankdata.com/result.htmhttp://www.jobbankdata.com/create-app.htmhttp://www.jobbankdata.com/create-cv.htmhttp://www.jobbankdata.com/interview.htmhttp://www.jobbankdata.com/site.htm Would you please stop violating the newsgroup terms of use by posting this useless non-Oracle related crapola. Sites supported by such unethical postings are not work visiting. -- Mark D Powell -- ...

SQL Server 2005 vs Oracle
Anyone know where I can find some good resources to help us choose between SQL and Oracle ( Progress Openedge as well ) . Any comments on what you would choose ?? We are creating a new Warehouse Management System which wil manage our very large inventory. Anyway comments suggestions welcome Thanks Paul this is something like comparing oranges and apples but lets try... Some questions arise: - what platform are you intend to work Unix, Windows ? Well, progress is dead meat, forget it. SQL Server has many features and looks good, but in mission critical systems it is still five year...

Pick Vs Oracle/SQL Server
As a relatively large and growing user of D3 we recently appointed consultants to undertake a wide ranging review of systems and functionality gap analysis given our rapid plans for expansion over the coming years. As a relative newcomer to D3 and Pick (from a RDBMS background!) I must say that I have found the platform to be stable(mostly) and very resource friendly from a hardware point of view. What is the problem though is the application we are currently utilising was not written with scale as one of it's fundamental design considerations and we are struggling in many areas to support the growth and dynamic nature of the business (we have only been around for 8 years but turnover this year will be around �70m). Couple this with a VAR who are very much stuck in the 80's model of 'we know best, the customer knows very little' mindset and who for the last 2 years or so have continualy missed targets, release dates and who are developing the product set in directions which the user base have very little requirements for and you can see the reason we have resorted to this review. The consultants we are using are well respected, independant and have much industry experience in many sectors. We have completed the business case for change and we are now ready to move to the specification and supplier selection stages - it is worth noting that D3 or other MV databases have not even appeared on the consultants horizon and they have in...

snap servers and suitability for oracle databases
hi I'm looking at purchasing a snap server 18000, but i'm getting conflicting messages with regards to its suitability for providing oracle storage. I'd have another machine with the oracle installation connecting to the storage either iscsi or nfs . Has anyone used any of the snap range for oracle databases ? I don't need super high perfornance, just a decent environment for development. Elaine On 4 Jan 2006 04:23:16 -0800, cmappy@hotmail.com wrote: >hi >I'm looking at purchasing a snap server 18000, but i'm getting >conflicting messages with ...

install oracle database server at home
Hi I am thinking of setting up an oracle database on my home computer - possibly Oracle 9i. I am wondering what spec (in terms of RAM especially) I would need. Any assistance would be appreciated. Cheers B. Baz wrote: > Hi > > I am thinking of setting up an oracle database on my home computer - > possibly Oracle 9i. I am wondering what spec (in terms of RAM > especially) I would need. Any assistance would be appreciated. > > Cheers > B. Practical minimums: - Pentium 600 - 512M Ram - 5G free disk - NOT Windows "Home" edition (XP Home, ME ...) - Prefer Linux or perhaps Windows 2000 Pro, XP Pro It is theoretically possible to go dn to 256M RAM but that becomes more an exercise in frustration. /Hans ...

Measurements: (was: Raw vs. Cooked files)
Hi, if you are interested : http://www.ibm.com/servers/eserver/zseries/library/techpapers/pdf/gm130667.pdf (There's a part where they tested raw devices vs. file system files as well. These measurements were all done on zSeries, not by myself as I did not get to do such extensive work. But this document is really extensive ...) Regards, Martin -- Martin Fuerderer IBM Informix Development Munich, Germany Information Management owner-informix-list@iiug.org wrote on 19.05.2005 16:43:23: > Martin Fuerderer wrote: > > Hi, > > I emailed a simple response yesterday, but the link seems to be lost. > Here's another more detailed one: > > It does not matter HOW much memory the OS has for a buffer cache. There are > still several reasons why RAW will ALWAYS be faster than COOKED devices or > OS filesystem files: > > 1) If the OS cache is too small bulk server IO like checkpoints and peak > load LRU flushing will thrash the cache killing OS and server performance. > - Thanks for pointing that out Jake. > > 2) All IO to a COOKED device or FS file MUST first be copied from the IDS > buffers to the OS buffers before the actual IO operation. This MUST be > extra overhead not needed on a RAW device - by definition! > > 3) If you are writing to an FS file chunk instead of a COOKED device you > have the additional overhead of the filesystem and direc...

Sun server with Oracle Database crashed
Hi All, My Sun server which is running Oracle database 10.2.0.3.0 got hung and the server had also crashed. The /DBATSTDB01/oracle mount point which is mounted on slice c1t0d0s3 is 100%. It is reflecting /var/adm/messages: Aug 31 15:40:43 blrtstdba02 ufs: [ID 845546 kern.notice] NOTICE: alloc: /DBATSTDB01/oracle: file system full The root slice " / " is occupied 82 %. After the crash, although the /DBATSTDB01/oracle slice is 100% full, the system hasn't hung so far. Is the /DBATSTDB01/oracle slice is causing the system to hang or should I check for hardware issues? Filesystem kbytes used avail capacity Mounted on /dev/dsk/c1t0d0s0 11093692 9000920 1981836 82% / /devices 0 0 0 0% /devices ctfs 0 0 0 0% /system/ contract proc 0 0 0 0% /proc mnttab 0 0 0 0% /etc/mnttab swap 2547944 1088 2546856 1% /etc/svc/ volatile objfs 0 0 0 0% /system/object /platform/sun4u-us3/lib/libc_psr/libc_psr_hwcap1.so.1 11093692 9000920 1981836 82% /platform/sun4u-us3/lib/libc_psr.so.1 /platform/sun4u-us3/lib/sparcv9/libc_psr/libc_psr_hwcap1.so.1 11093692 9000920 1981836 82% /platform/sun4u-us3/lib/sparcv9/libc_psr.so. 1 /dev/dsk/c1t0d0s5 6050982 1646347 4344126 28% /var swap 2554304 7448 254685...

codebase vs Advantage Database Server
I would like to use Codebase C/S instead of BDE. Can Someone tell me a reason to not do it? :-) What do you think about Advantage Database Server and Codebase? Thank very much. Davide Lo Giudice ...

raw vs. cooked files under linux
Hi all, i am an linux newbie. I must shift our Databases from SCO Unix (IDS 7.31 UD4) to SuSE Linux Enterprise Edition 8.1 (2.4.21-190-smp glibc 2.2.5) or (8.2) or 9 and SuSE Linux Professional 9.3 (2.6.11.4 glibc 2.3.4) (IDS 7.31 UD8). Later on i want to upgrade (in place) to IDS 10.0. Which Version of SuSE Linux Enterprise Edition must I use (8.? , 9 ..)? Under Sco Unix we use raw-devices. Is it better to use cooked files or raw files under these Linux-Versions? A colleague mentioned, it can be, that later releases of Linux don't support raw-devices. Is that correct? Experiences or comments are welcome. Thanks in advance. (Excuse my poor school-english) Heinz sending to informix-list If you are in a slow-change environment raw-files are not a bad thing. They create extra problems on the management side that cooked files do not. Fast-changing environments create more demand on your time so why put yourself into extra work with raw files? They don't give you enough of a difference in performance to really warrant them unless you are really demanding that extra 10%. Cooked files are also also more flexible on backups, you can back the dbspaces up with a regular backup tool or use the Informix backup tools, but raw files will have to be backed up with Informix tools only. SLES9 is quite a sea change from SLES8, and you could probably get away without SLES and go with the workstation Pro 9.3 if you are on a budget. SLES has...

Web resources about - Raw vs. Cooked - comp.databases.oracle.server

Punky Brüster – Cooked on Phonics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Punky Brüster – Cooked on Phonics (a pun of the literacy program Hooked on Phonics ) is the debut studio album by Canadian musician Devin Townsend ...

The cooked veggieducken - Flickr - Photo Sharing!
Explore The Sporkful's photos on Flickr. The Sporkful has uploaded 46 photos to Flickr.

Chef dismembered, cooked girlfriend in Brisbane apartment
A young chef had been boiling his girlfriend's dismembered body parts in his Brisbane apartment when he was discovered by police on Saturday ...


Carbon tax not all it was cooked up to be
Carbon tax not all it was cooked up to be

HomeCooked app: Buy your neighbour’s home-cooked food instead of takeaways - The Courier-Mail Search ...
WE COULD soon be bidding farewell to the fish and chip shop and saying ta-ta to the takeaway Thai if a plan to transform the way we eat, in the ...


Tanzanian man 'beheaded and cooked'
A Tanzanian man has been beheaded and cooked following accusations of adultery.

They came, they cooked, they conquered: it's all about being Italian
They came, they cooked, they conquered: it's all about being Italian

The books are being cooked on 457 visas
The foreign worker program is being rorted just as the student visas were.

Resources last updated: 3/20/2016 5:56:52 AM