I like to think of it this way:

If a table is defined as "small" when it does not need
to be indexed, then there is no such thing as a small
table

Others didn't mention - but you may want to look at
using IOT's for some of the cases you've mentioned

Cheers
Connor

 --- "Jesse, Rich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >
Actually, I did know about the BHR thing, primarily
> from this list, just as
> you did.  It was the indexing one that cought me
> off-guard.  I was just
> using the former as a reference.
> 
> Speaking of which, your Don Quixote reference is
> priceless!  "Facts are the
> enemy of truth."  :D
> 
> Rich Jesse                           System/Database
> Administrator
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]              Quad/Tech
> International, Sussex, WI USA
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: DENNIS WILLIAMS
> [mailto:DWILLIAMS@;LIFETOUCH.COM]
> > Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 2:04 PM
> > To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
> > Subject: RE: Is nothing sacred? (Oracle vs The
> Experts)
> > 
> > 
> > Rich - Actually, if you took an Oracle Performance
> Tuning 
> > class from Oracle
> > Education right now, you would find the BHR
> mentioned little 
> > and Oracle
> > waits emphasized a great deal. I took that class
> about a 
> > month ago and the
> > instructor described how Cary had prevailed in
> convincing the 
> > people at
> > Oracle that counted and the class materials were
> being 
> > rewritten for the
> > next class after mine. 
> >    Well, being a computer professional is a hard
> burden, what with the
> > underlying assumption ever changing. Actually,
> given the extensive
> > discussions we've had on this forum about BHR vs.
> waits, I'm 
> > surprised it
> > caught you unawares. This was where I'd first
> heard about the 
> > new emphasis
> > on waits. Of course, with waits becoming the
> conventional 
> > wisdom, Cary and
> > others will have to find another windmill to tilt
> at. Cary - 
> > anything lined
> > up?
> > Dennis Williams
> > DBA, 40%OCP
> > Lifetouch, Inc.
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> > 
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 10:58 AM
> > To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
> > 
> > 
> > So, there I am, on 8.1.7.2 (and .4) on HP/UX 11.0,
> with a 
> > process that runs
> > 20 minutes out of every hour of the day (despite
> my protests to it's
> > design).  After it starts having problems (go
> figure), it 
> > becomes a priority
> > to speed it up.
> > 
> > Thanks to a 10046 trace, we see that the query
> taking the 
> > most elapsed time
> > does FTSs on each of two very small tables (1
> block and 4 blocks -- 8K
> > blocksize).  These tables are not indexed, as per
> the official Oracle
> > recommendation.  After reading the excellent
> Hotsos paper 
> > "When to index a
> > table" (THANKS, CARY!), I added an index to reduce
> elapsed 
> > time on this
> > query by 50% (150 to 75 seconds in test), proving
> to me that 
> > the paper is
> > valid.  And I've only read to page four!
> > 
> > OK, first I'm taught by Oracle to look at Buffer
> Cache Hit Ratios as a
> > measure of performance, then told (and thoroughly
> convinced) 
> > by experts that
> > this is bunk.  Now, I found out that the 15% (or
> 10% or 
> > whatever, depending
> > on version) ratio of rows returned to total rows
> in 
> > determining when to use
> > an index in a query is garbage.
> > 
> > 1)  Why is this?
> > 
> > 2)  What other pearls of performance wisdom from
> Oracle Corp should I
> > completely disregard as false?
> > 
> > I know there's an Oracle Fallacy website
> somewhere...
> > 
> > It just looks bad on me, our department, and
> Oracle when, once again,
> > something I've been preaching to our developers as
> gospel 
> > turns out to be
> > completely false.
> > 
> > Maybe I'm grumpy because it's snowing on my leaves
> right 
> > now...  <sigh>
> > 
> > 
> > Rich
> -- 
> Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ:
> http://www.orafaq.com
> -- 
> Author: Jesse, Rich
>   INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> Fat City Network Services    -- 858-538-5051
> http://www.fatcity.com
> San Diego, California        -- Mailing list and web
> hosting services
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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). 

=====
Connor McDonald
http://www.oracledba.co.uk
http://www.oaktable.net

"GIVE a man a fish and he will eat for a day. But TEACH him how to fish, and...he will 
sit in a boat and drink beer all day"

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Everything you'll ever need on one web page
from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
http://uk.my.yahoo.com
-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
-- 
Author: =?iso-8859-1?q?Connor=20McDonald?=
  INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Fat City Network Services    -- 858-538-5051 http://www.fatcity.com
San Diego, California        -- Mailing list and web hosting services
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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).

Reply via email to