RE: DBWR slaves in NT???

[Kevin Kostyszyn]

Title: RE: DBWR slaves in NT???

Ummm, Ross, was that a Freudian slip?  db_block what?  hehehh

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Mohan, Ross
Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2001 3:41 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Subject: RE: DBWR slaves in NT???

I agree. I focussed my answer almost exclusively
on Raghu's last line. "My import is killing me."

In my hazily-recalled modicum of experience, this
probably has a simple solution.

Or, hell, maybe I am wrong. It *could* require
doing something slick and esoteric, like calling in
Rivest from RSA to recalculate the prime number seed
for the db_block_hash_fuckits parameter and then
rewriting the kxscvngr subroutine in assembler
to more aggressively clump and scavenge the dirty
blocks in mode "1016" from the warm end of the
buffer cache.

But, I doubt it.

- Ross

p.s. Raghu, stay in touch, and tell us what you try,
willya?

-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin Kostyszyn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2001 3:09 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Subject: RE: DBWR slaves in NT???

If I am completely off the wall here just slap me around a little bit.  But
couldn't you play with the init parameteres DBWR_IO_SLAVES or
DB_WRITER_PROCESSES to help improve write performance?  I mean, I agree with
Ross, there is only one disk, but maybe it could help a little to help
simulate asynchronous I/O?
Kev
Just thinkin out loud again!

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2001 2:31 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L

Actually, that message is invalid for Oracle8 DBs.  From what I can gather,
the DB_FILES init.ora parameter only
potentially affected DBWR performance in Oracle7.  In Oracle8, it ain't
true.

Remember, the DBWRs write dirty buffers (data in memory that has been
modified from it's counterpart in a datafile) from the buffer cache (memory)
to the datafiles (disk).  In O7, the DBWR I/O clump size, or how many dirty
blocks could be written at once (also sometimes referred to as the DBWR's
"internal write batch size"), was calculated as:

        DB_FILE_SIMULTANEOUS_WRITES*DB_FILES/2.

In O8, the DBWR I/O clump size is static, and is different from platform to
platform.  Thus, for Oracle8, the advise to change DB_FILES is bogus.

HTH!

Rich Jesse                          System/Database Administrator
[EMAIL PROTECTED]             Quad/Tech International, Sussex, WI USA

Disclaimer:  After taking the Oracle8 Perf Tuning class, I think I know more
than I do.  Don't blame me for your (in)actions based on my opinion!

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2001 12:27
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L

not a dbwriter problem.
on a "single-disk wonder", your best
bet is to DUMP all indexes on loadable
tables, then load your data, then rebuild
the indexes.
of course, that might take just as long.
any possiblity of getting more disk?
like, several? a raid controller?
mit gluck!

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2001 11:26 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L

Hi Friends
I have toad tool for my NT database
DBWR Average Scan Depth 1024  **Number of DB_Files too high??
I got doubt due to from v$waitstat I got data block waits some time 8000 and

some times higher number. How can I increase the DBWR slaves on NT??
although I set in development box, How can I see as background process
really working for me??
I have my datafile and indexes same on E disk drive, My hit ratios are okay,

My import is killing me.
Any help appreciated.
Thanks
Raghu.
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
--
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
--
Author: Raghu Kota
  INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fat City Network Services    -- (858) 538-5051  FAX: (858) 538-5051
San Diego, California        -- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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).

------------------------------------------------------------------------

This message has been scanned for viruses with Trend Micro's Interscan
VirusWall.
--
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
--
Author: Jesse, Rich
  INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Fat City Network Services    -- (858) 538-5051  FAX: (858) 538-5051
San Diego, California        -- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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: Kevin Kostyszyn
  INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Fat City Network Services    -- (858) 538-5051  FAX: (858) 538-5051
San Diego, California        -- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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).