RE: rebuilding indexes - sure to cause a ruckus

2003-12-13 Thread Cary Millsap
 not to mention running 48 batch jobs on a 8CPU box with all of them 
 committing after every record and using the table to generate keys
(Cary 
 would love this one) ;) They wanted to find other reasons and he 
 conveniently ignored the real problem.

Beautiful...


Cary Millsap
Hotsos Enterprises, Ltd.
http://www.hotsos.com

Upcoming events:
- Performance Diagnosis 101: 12/16 Detroit, 1/27 Atlanta
- SQL Optimization 101: 2/16 Dallas
- Hotsos Symposium 2004: March 7-10 Dallas
- Visit www.hotsos.com for schedule details...


-Original Message-
Denny Koovakattu
Sent: Friday, December 12, 2003 3:20 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L


  If it's from Oracle, I would believe it, i.e., I would believe 
somebody did actually say that ;) But it does not make it right. Now 
only if management knew/believed that.

Some more from Oracle,

- Oracle writes to one log member and then the other. So you need both 
log members for recovery. Volunteered to help us use 
_allow_resetlogs_corruption when we had one intact log member. (Took a 
lot of effort not to tell him to read the concepts manual. Was from a 
Sev1 problem that happened a few years ago.)

-  Increasing hit ratio, OS swap size to 3 times the OS memory and 
improving data proximity in an index (never really understood this one) 
among other bizarre ones  to improve performance. This from an Oracle 
consultant who was called onsite by Development Management because we 
claimed the real reason was because the application was committing after

every record to avoid locking issues on a table generating sequences, 
not to mention running 48 batch jobs on a 8CPU box with all of them 
committing after every record and using the table to generate keys (Cary

would love this one) ;) They wanted to find other reasons and he 
conveniently ignored the real problem.

BTW, I personally don't like having a zillion extents for an object 
(more so when you have multiple DBA Replacement Tools querying 
dba_extents constantly and showing flashing red lights) and would expect

the development team NOT to give me a deer in the headlights look when 
asked for table sizing info. Response most often heard is Why do you 
need that. Oracle will be able to take care of it or can't Oracle take 
care of it or some variation thereof  What I really want to say is if 
you don't have any idea about your data, then please don't write any 
SQL. That should take care of most performance issues.

Barbara Baker wrote:

You probably think you're joking.
Unfortunately . . .

We've been fighting with Oracle for several months
about SEVERE performance degradation on an OpenVMS
application after we upgraded the database to 8.1.7.4

One of Oracle's recommendations taken directly from
our TAR just 2 weeks ago:

o Ensure tables and indexes have as few extents as
possible.

sigh...

Barb


--- Bobak, Mark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  

I think this subject has been done to death.  We
should talk about less contentious issues such as:

 - The buffer cache hit ratio, your friend in expert
Oracle tuning!
 - Rebuild your tables regularly to reduce the
number of extents and improve performance!
 - Disk access is at least 10,000x slower than
memory, to tune your database, eliminate physical
I/O!

Anyone else got and good ones? ;-)

-Mark




-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
-- 
Author: Denny Koovakattu
  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).

-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
-- 
Author: Cary Millsap
  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).


RE: rebuilding indexes - sure to cause a ruckus

2003-12-12 Thread Barbara Baker
You probably think you're joking.
Unfortunately . . .

We've been fighting with Oracle for several months
about SEVERE performance degradation on an OpenVMS
application after we upgraded the database to 8.1.7.4

One of Oracle's recommendations taken directly from
our TAR just 2 weeks ago:

o Ensure tables and indexes have as few extents as
possible.

sigh...

Barb


--- Bobak, Mark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 I think this subject has been done to death.  We
 should talk about less contentious issues such as:
 
  - The buffer cache hit ratio, your friend in expert
 Oracle tuning!
  - Rebuild your tables regularly to reduce the
 number of extents and improve performance!
  - Disk access is at least 10,000x slower than
 memory, to tune your database, eliminate physical
 I/O!
 
 Anyone else got and good ones? ;-)
 
 -Mark
 
 -Original Message-
 Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 5:24 PM
 To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
 
 
  BTW, does anyone know what a rocket scientist
 refers to when 
  they say Hey,
  this is all quite easy, it sure ain't ? ?
  
  Cheers ;)
  
  Richard
 
 Surely the Rocket Scientist version must be Hey,
 this is all quite easy, it sure ain't index
 rebuilding
 
 very evil grin
 
 Ciao
 Fuzzy
 :-)
 -- 
 Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ:
 http://www.orafaq.net
 -- 
 Author: Grant Allen
   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).
 -- 
 Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ:
 http://www.orafaq.net
 -- 
 Author: Bobak, Mark
   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).


__
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/
-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
-- 
Author: Barbara Baker
  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).


RE: rebuilding indexes - sure to cause a ruckus

2003-12-12 Thread Bobak, Mark
Ouch.

Suddenly, it seems not so funny

-Original Message-
Sent: Friday, December 12, 2003 11:25 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L


You probably think you're joking.
Unfortunately . . .

We've been fighting with Oracle for several months
about SEVERE performance degradation on an OpenVMS
application after we upgraded the database to 8.1.7.4

One of Oracle's recommendations taken directly from
our TAR just 2 weeks ago:

o Ensure tables and indexes have as few extents as
possible.

sigh...

Barb


--- Bobak, Mark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 I think this subject has been done to death.  We
 should talk about less contentious issues such as:
 
  - The buffer cache hit ratio, your friend in expert
 Oracle tuning!
  - Rebuild your tables regularly to reduce the
 number of extents and improve performance!
  - Disk access is at least 10,000x slower than
 memory, to tune your database, eliminate physical
 I/O!
 
 Anyone else got and good ones? ;-)
 
 -Mark
 
 -Original Message-
 Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 5:24 PM
 To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
 
 
  BTW, does anyone know what a rocket scientist
 refers to when 
  they say Hey,
  this is all quite easy, it sure ain't ? ?
  
  Cheers ;)
  
  Richard
 
 Surely the Rocket Scientist version must be Hey,
 this is all quite easy, it sure ain't index
 rebuilding
 
 very evil grin
 
 Ciao
 Fuzzy
 :-)
 -- 
 Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ:
 http://www.orafaq.net
 -- 
 Author: Grant Allen
   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).
 -- 
 Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ:
 http://www.orafaq.net
 -- 
 Author: Bobak, Mark
   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).


__
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/
-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
-- 
Author: Barbara Baker
  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).
-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
-- 
Author: Bobak, Mark
  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).


Re: rebuilding indexes - sure to cause a ruckus

2003-12-12 Thread Denny Koovakattu
 If it's from Oracle, I would believe it, i.e., I would believe 
somebody did actually say that ;) But it does not make it right. Now 
only if management knew/believed that.

Some more from Oracle,

- Oracle writes to one log member and then the other. So you need both 
log members for recovery. Volunteered to help us use 
_allow_resetlogs_corruption when we had one intact log member. (Took a 
lot of effort not to tell him to read the concepts manual. Was from a 
Sev1 problem that happened a few years ago.)

-  Increasing hit ratio, OS swap size to 3 times the OS memory and 
improving data proximity in an index (never really understood this one) 
among other bizarre ones  to improve performance. This from an Oracle 
consultant who was called onsite by Development Management because we 
claimed the real reason was because the application was committing after 
every record to avoid locking issues on a table generating sequences, 
not to mention running 48 batch jobs on a 8CPU box with all of them 
committing after every record and using the table to generate keys (Cary 
would love this one) ;) They wanted to find other reasons and he 
conveniently ignored the real problem.

BTW, I personally don't like having a zillion extents for an object 
(more so when you have multiple DBA Replacement Tools querying 
dba_extents constantly and showing flashing red lights) and would expect 
the development team NOT to give me a deer in the headlights look when 
asked for table sizing info. Response most often heard is Why do you 
need that. Oracle will be able to take care of it or can't Oracle take 
care of it or some variation thereof  What I really want to say is if 
you don't have any idea about your data, then please don't write any 
SQL. That should take care of most performance issues.

Barbara Baker wrote:

You probably think you're joking.
Unfortunately . . .
We've been fighting with Oracle for several months
about SEVERE performance degradation on an OpenVMS
application after we upgraded the database to 8.1.7.4
One of Oracle's recommendations taken directly from
our TAR just 2 weeks ago:
o Ensure tables and indexes have as few extents as
possible.
sigh...

Barb

--- Bobak, Mark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 

I think this subject has been done to death.  We
should talk about less contentious issues such as:
- The buffer cache hit ratio, your friend in expert
Oracle tuning!
- Rebuild your tables regularly to reduce the
number of extents and improve performance!
- Disk access is at least 10,000x slower than
memory, to tune your database, eliminate physical
I/O!
Anyone else got and good ones? ;-)

-Mark

   

--
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
--
Author: Denny Koovakattu
 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).


Re: rebuilding indexes - sure to cause a ruckus

2003-12-12 Thread Mladen Gogala
Can we, please,  change terminology and use the term log file 
instead of log member. I distinctly remember backup  recovery 
class in NYC when a guy with a heavy accent popped the following
question:
 Can I recover the database if I lose my member?

It was the time after lunch while we were all drinking sodas
in the lobby. I distinctly remember the feeling of diet coke
coming out of my nostrils. It wasn't pleasant.

On 12/12/2003 04:19:33 PM, Denny Koovakattu wrote:
 
   If it's from Oracle, I would believe it, i.e., I would believe 
 somebody did actually say that ;) But it does not make it right. Now 
 only if management knew/believed that.
 
 Some more from Oracle,
 
 - Oracle writes to one log member and then the other. So you need both 
 log members for recovery. Volunteered to help us use 
 _allow_resetlogs_corruption when we had one intact log member. (Took a 
 lot of effort not to tell him to read the concepts manual. Was from a 
 Sev1 problem that happened a few years ago.)
 
 -  Increasing hit ratio, OS swap size to 3 times the OS memory and 
 improving data proximity in an index (never really understood this one) 
 among other bizarre ones  to improve performance. This from an Oracle 
 consultant who was called onsite by Development Management because we 
 claimed the real reason was because the application was committing after 
 every record to avoid locking issues on a table generating sequences, 
 not to mention running 48 batch jobs on a 8CPU box with all of them 
 committing after every record and using the table to generate keys (Cary 
 would love this one) ;) They wanted to find other reasons and he 
 conveniently ignored the real problem.
 
 BTW, I personally don't like having a zillion extents for an object 
 (more so when you have multiple DBA Replacement Tools querying 
 dba_extents constantly and showing flashing red lights) and would expect 
 the development team NOT to give me a deer in the headlights look when 
 asked for table sizing info. Response most often heard is Why do you 
 need that. Oracle will be able to take care of it or can't Oracle take 
 care of it or some variation thereof  What I really want to say is if 
 you don't have any idea about your data, then please don't write any 
 SQL. That should take care of most performance issues.
 
 Barbara Baker wrote:
 
 You probably think you're joking.
 Unfortunately . . .
 
 We've been fighting with Oracle for several months
 about SEVERE performance degradation on an OpenVMS
 application after we upgraded the database to 8.1.7.4
 
 One of Oracle's recommendations taken directly from
 our TAR just 2 weeks ago:
 
 o Ensure tables and indexes have as few extents as
 possible.
 
 sigh...
 
 Barb
 
 
 --- Bobak, Mark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
   
 
 I think this subject has been done to death.  We
 should talk about less contentious issues such as:
 
  - The buffer cache hit ratio, your friend in expert
 Oracle tuning!
  - Rebuild your tables regularly to reduce the
 number of extents and improve performance!
  - Disk access is at least 10,000x slower than
 memory, to tune your database, eliminate physical
 I/O!
 
 Anyone else got and good ones? ;-)
 
 -Mark
 
 
 
 
 -- 
 Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
 -- 
 Author: Denny Koovakattu
   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).
 

Mladen Gogala
Oracle DBA
-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
-- 
Author: Mladen Gogala
  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).


RE: rebuilding indexes - sure to cause a ruckus

2003-12-11 Thread Jamadagni, Rajendra
Mark,

I just met Elvis behind local Wal-Mart parking lot, we discussed the same topics ... 
funny you mention them. Oh ans we did talk about investing in Enron too (got a hot 
tip, the stock is going to go up).

Raj

Rajendra dot Jamadagni at nospamespn dot com
All Views expressed in this email are strictly personal.
QOTD: Any clod can have facts, having an opinion is an art !


-Original Message-
Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 5:39 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L


I think this subject has been done to death.  We should talk about less contentious 
issues such as:

 - The buffer cache hit ratio, your friend in expert Oracle tuning!
 - Rebuild your tables regularly to reduce the number of extents and improve 
performance!
 - Disk access is at least 10,000x slower than memory, to tune your database, 
eliminate physical I/O!

Anyone else got and good ones? ;-)

-Mark

**
This e-mail message is confidential, intended only for the named recipient(s) above 
and may contain information that is privileged, attorney work product or exempt from 
disclosure under applicable law. If you have received this message in error, or are 
not the named recipient(s), please immediately notify corporate MIS at (860) 766-2000 
and delete this e-mail message from your computer, Thank you.
**4
-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
-- 
Author: Jamadagni, Rajendra
  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).


Re: rebuilding indexes - sure to cause a ruckus

2003-12-10 Thread Richard Foote
Thanks Raj,

Unfortunately, in my rush to get the kids to school in time, I stuffed the
formatting when my cut 'n' pasting got converted to plain text.

Hope you found it all useful.

Cheers

Richard
- Original Message -
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 2:49 AM


 Richard's explanation and example from c.d.o.s now has a permanent tinyurl
link ... http://tinyurl.com/yflq if anyone is interested ... this might be
better for bookmarks.

 Raj
 --
--
 Rajendra dot Jamadagni at nospamespn dot com
 All Views expressed in this email are strictly personal.
 QOTD: Any clod can have facts, having an opinion is an art !


 -Original Message-
 Sent: Monday, December 08, 2003 4:29 PM
 To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L


 Hi Yong,

 Saying there are a few errors is being a little kind to Don's Inside
Oracle Indexing article.

 [ rest snipped ]




**
 This e-mail message is confidential, intended only for the named
recipient(s) above and may contain information that is privileged, attorney
work product or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you have
received this message in error, or are not the named recipient(s), please
immediately notify corporate MIS at (860) 766-2000 and delete this e-mail
message from your computer, Thank you.


**5
 --
 Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
 --
 Author: Jamadagni, Rajendra
   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).



-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
-- 
Author: Richard Foote
  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).


Re: rebuilding indexes - sure to cause a ruckus

2003-12-10 Thread Richard Foote
Hi Yong,

One thing I should have mentioned when I posted my epic is that it not
only attempts to correct the numerous technical errors in the article but
also attempts to answer the various questions the article raises but totally
fails to address. What I find most astonishing about the article is that the
author confesses at the conclusion he has no idea when and why an index
rebuild is beneficial. And as the author doesn't know, then surely it must
all be so difficult, a scientific-less phenomenon.

If I can convince anyone who makes it through my email that this isn't
rocket science, then it's been worth the bandwidth.

BTW, does anyone know what a rocket scientist refers to when they say Hey,
this is all quite easy, it sure ain't ? ?

Cheers ;)

Richard

- Original Message -
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 5:44 AM


 Thanks, Richard. I'll read your long message more carefully later. I like
your
 statement that rebuilding an index or not is not rocket science. One needs
to
 measure the performance before and after the rebuild and make a conclusion
 himself. Many times we discuss performance issues and get very technical
and
 sophisticated, without showing experimental results! Having been a science
 researcher before, I'd like to emphasize that facts speak louder than
theories.
 There may be 10,000 24x7 databases in the world that don't easily allow
even
 testing an index rebuild. But there may be 100 times more production
databases
 in the world that are not 24x7. The individual DBA needs to do his control
 study and conclude, using experts' opinions as reference.

 Yong Huang



 __
 Do you Yahoo!?
 New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
 http://photos.yahoo.com/
 --
 Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
 --
 Author: Yong Huang
   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).



-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
-- 
Author: Richard Foote
  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).


Re: rebuilding indexes - sure to cause a ruckus

2003-12-10 Thread K Gopalakrishnan
Richard:

I think that is the simple way of questioning other person's capacity.

Remember this statment (borrowed from some one !!)

If you are telling something is simple,
you are questioning the other person's intelligence !!'


KG

-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
-- 
Author: K Gopalakrishnan
  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).


RE: rebuilding indexes - sure to cause a ruckus

2003-12-10 Thread Jamadagni, Rajendra
Richard, I found it immensely useful, that's why I created the tinyurl and went to 
c.d.o.s and read the whole thread, from first to last post. (man those people need to 
learn to weed out old comments in the replies).

This is what I love about this forum, it comes with huge amount of knowledge, eager 
members who are ready to educate and learn, add a dash of rhetoric and a right amount 
of fun. In other words a perfect combination.

Thanks for your explanation.
Raj

Rajendra dot Jamadagni at nospamespn dot com
All Views expressed in this email are strictly personal.
QOTD: Any clod can have facts, having an opinion is an art !


-Original Message-
Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 4:15 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L


Thanks Raj,

Unfortunately, in my rush to get the kids to school in time, I stuffed the formatting 
when my cut 'n' pasting got converted to plain text.
Hope you found it all useful.

Cheers

Richard

**
This e-mail message is confidential, intended only for the named recipient(s) above 
and may contain information that is privileged, attorney work product or exempt from 
disclosure under applicable law. If you have received this message in error, or are 
not the named recipient(s), please immediately notify corporate MIS at (860) 766-2000 
and delete this e-mail message from your computer, Thank you.
**4
-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
-- 
Author: Jamadagni, Rajendra
  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).


OT Re: Re: rebuilding indexes - sure to cause a ruckus

2003-12-10 Thread Guido Konsolke
Hi Richard,

I think, there are 2 candidates for an answer.
1life (nothing is more difficult)
2...love (ever tried to read your madam's thoughts?) ;-)

Corrections welcome (as always).

Cheers,
Guido

 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 10.12.2003  11.39 Uhr 
(snip)
If I can convince anyone who makes it through my email that this isn't
rocket science, then it's been worth the bandwidth.
BTW, does anyone know what a rocket scientist refers to when they say Hey,
this is all quite easy, it sure ain't ? ?

Cheers ;)

Richard


-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
-- 
Author: Guido Konsolke
  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).


Re: rebuilding indexes - sure to cause a ruckus

2003-12-10 Thread Richard Foote



Terse ?

You haven't heard me terse until youhear me 
trying to get the kids to sleep at night. 

Don got it easy ;)

- Original Message - 

  From: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L 
  
  Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 8:14 
  AM
  Subject: Re: rebuilding indexes - sure to 
  cause a ruckus
  And in case you miss it in 
  Richard's terse message, one of the big reasons that it is not 'rocket science' is that you can perform 
  operations that modify the index(es), and perform block dumps of the index as you go.  You can see 
  exactly what Oracle is doing with the 
  index. Jared 
  


  
  Yong Huang [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
12/09/2003 11:44 AM 
Please respond to ORACLE-L 
  To:   
 Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] cc:

 Subject:Re: rebuilding indexes - sure 
to cause a ruckusThanks, Richard. I'll read your long message more 
  carefully later. I like yourstatement that rebuilding an index or not is 
  not rocket science. One needs tomeasure the performance before and after 
  the rebuild and make a conclusionhimself. Many times we discuss 
  performance issues and get very technical andsophisticated, without 
  showing experimental results! Having been a scienceresearcher before, I'd 
  like to emphasize that facts speak louder than theories.There may be 
  10,000 24x7 databases in the world that don't easily allow eventesting an 
  index rebuild. But there may be 100 times more production databasesin the 
  world that are not 24x7. The individual DBA needs to do his controlstudy 
  and conclude, using experts' opinions as reference.Yong 
  Huang__Do you 
  Yahoo!?New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and 
  sharing.http://photos.yahoo.com/-- Please see the official 
  ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net-- Author: Yong 
  HuangINET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Fat City Network Services  
  -- 858-538-5051 http://www.fatcity.comSan Diego, California  
-- Mailing list and web hosting 
  services-To 
  REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail messageto: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and inthe message 
  BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L(or the name of mailing 
  list you want to be removed from). You mayalso send the HELP command 
  for other information (like 
subscribing).


Re: rebuilding indexes - sure to cause a ruckus

2003-12-10 Thread Richard Foote
Hi KG,

O, you've got me thinking here !!

I'm not too sure that I've really questioned anyone's intelligence. I've
always measured someone's intelligence by:

1. How quickly the can learn and absorb new information
2. How much they know and appreciate the work of David Bowie

A quick check of the Oxford Dictionary describes the word intelligence as
mental ability to learn and understand things (although interestingly,
there's no mention of DB).

I guess the issue I have is that if intelligent people are told and feed
incorrect information (and Don's article has it's share of incorrect
information) then fundamentally it's one's knowledge that I begin
questioning. Unfortunately, I believe there are a lot of intelligent people
in the Oracle community who have a questionable knowledge of Oracle (or
aspects of Oracle) as a direct result of the poor quality of information
that people absorb (be it books, training courses, web-articles, etc..). And
undoubtedly many of these people that write substandard materials in turn
have picked up flawed knowledge due to the quality of their readings,
education and lack of proper research.

As I mentioned Knowledge is the key that unlocks the door of doubt. If you
have no doubts about something, it by definition becomes simple !!

Unfortunately, if you're presented with the wrong information, you get
access to the wrong key ;)

Cheers

Richard

- Original Message -
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 10:09 PM


 Richard:

 I think that is the simple way of questioning other person's capacity.

 Remember this statment (borrowed from some one !!)

 If you are telling something is simple,
 you are questioning the other person's intelligence !!'


 KG

 --
 Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
 --
 Author: K Gopalakrishnan
   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).



-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
-- 
Author: Richard Foote
  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).


RE: rebuilding indexes - sure to cause a ruckus

2003-12-10 Thread Thater, William
Richard Foote  scribbled on the wall in glitter crayon:

 BTW, does anyone know what a rocket scientist refers to when they say
 Hey, this is all quite easy, it sure ain't ? ?

the only two i know use theoretical physics.;-)

--
Bill Shrek Thater ORACLE DBA  
I'm going to work my ticket if I can... -- Gilwell song
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Nothing can move faster than light. - Albert Einstein
-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
-- 
Author: Thater, William
  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).


RE: rebuilding indexes - sure to cause a ruckus

2003-12-10 Thread Grant Allen
 BTW, does anyone know what a rocket scientist refers to when 
 they say Hey,
 this is all quite easy, it sure ain't ? ?
 
 Cheers ;)
 
 Richard

Surely the Rocket Scientist version must be Hey, this is all quite easy, it sure 
ain't index rebuilding

very evil grin

Ciao
Fuzzy
:-)
-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
-- 
Author: Grant Allen
  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).


RE: rebuilding indexes - sure to cause a ruckus

2003-12-10 Thread Davey, Alan
LOL,

This made me think of the Simpson's Halloween episode where Monty Burns
says,
'Smithers, this isn't rocket science, its brain surgery'.

-
Alan Davey
Senior Analyst/Project Leader
Oracle 9i OCA; 3/4 OCP
w) 973.267.5990 x458
w) 212.295.3458



-Original Message-
Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 5:24 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L


 BTW, does anyone know what a rocket scientist refers to when 
 they say Hey,
 this is all quite easy, it sure ain't ? ?
 
 Cheers ;)
 
 Richard

Surely the Rocket Scientist version must be Hey, this is all quite easy, it
sure ain't index rebuilding

very evil grin

Ciao
Fuzzy
:-)
-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
-- 
Author: Grant Allen
  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).


This information in this e-mail is intended solely for the addressee and
may contain information which is confidential or privileged.  Access to this
e-mail by anyone else is unauthorized.  If you are not the intended
recipient, or believe that you have received this communication in error,
please do not print, copy, retransmit, disseminate, or otherwise use the
information. Also, please notify the sender that you have received this
e-mail in error, and delete the copy you received.


-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
-- 
Author: Davey, Alan
  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).


RE: rebuilding indexes - sure to cause a ruckus

2003-12-10 Thread Bobak, Mark
I think this subject has been done to death.  We should talk about less contentious 
issues such as:

 - The buffer cache hit ratio, your friend in expert Oracle tuning!
 - Rebuild your tables regularly to reduce the number of extents and improve 
performance!
 - Disk access is at least 10,000x slower than memory, to tune your database, 
eliminate physical I/O!

Anyone else got and good ones? ;-)

-Mark

-Original Message-
Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 5:24 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L


 BTW, does anyone know what a rocket scientist refers to when 
 they say Hey,
 this is all quite easy, it sure ain't ? ?
 
 Cheers ;)
 
 Richard

Surely the Rocket Scientist version must be Hey, this is all quite easy, it sure 
ain't index rebuilding

very evil grin

Ciao
Fuzzy
:-)
-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
-- 
Author: Grant Allen
  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).
-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
-- 
Author: Bobak, Mark
  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).


Re: rebuilding indexes - sure to cause a ruckus

2003-12-10 Thread Mogens Nørgaard
How about: Keep re-analyzing your tables and indexes. Run 
gather_statistics (or whatever) all the time.

Bobak, Mark wrote:

I think this subject has been done to death.  We should talk about less contentious issues such as:

- The buffer cache hit ratio, your friend in expert Oracle tuning!
- Rebuild your tables regularly to reduce the number of extents and improve 
performance!
- Disk access is at least 10,000x slower than memory, to tune your database, eliminate 
physical I/O!
Anyone else got and good ones? ;-)

-Mark

-Original Message-
Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 5:24 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
 

BTW, does anyone know what a rocket scientist refers to when 
they say Hey,
this is all quite easy, it sure ain't ? ?

Cheers ;)

Richard
   

Surely the Rocket Scientist version must be Hey, this is all quite easy, it sure ain't index rebuilding

very evil grin

Ciao
Fuzzy
:-)
 

--
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
--
Author: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Mogens_N=F8rgaard?=
 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).


Re: rebuilding indexes - sure to cause a ruckus

2003-12-09 Thread Richard Foote
Hi Tanel,

I recommend a strong cup of coffee and a small nap 1/2 way through ;)


- Original Message - 
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2003 7:44 AM


Ouch, I gotta take a day off to read this one ;)







-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
-- 
Author: Richard Foote
  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).


Re: rebuilding indexes - sure to cause a ruckus

2003-12-09 Thread Richard Foote
Hi Paul,

The long one includes a discussion on why you should generally coalesce
rather than rebuild indexes ;)

Cheers

Richard
- Original Message -
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2003 8:44 AM


 somewhat on the longish side???

 I'd hate to see a long article!  ;-)




 --- Richard Foote [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  Hi Yong,
 
  Saying there are a few errors is being a little kind to Don's
  Inside
  Oracle Indexing article.
 
  In part, these are some of the issues I raised directly with Don in a
  number
  of emails (warning somewhat on the longish side ;):


 __
 Do you Yahoo!?
 Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
 http://companion.yahoo.com/
 --
 Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
 --
 Author: Paul Baumgartel
   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).



-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
-- 
Author: Richard Foote
  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).


Re: rebuilding indexes - sure to cause a ruckus

2003-12-09 Thread Richard Foote
Hi Steve,

I agree completely, but the question is would you rebuild it afterwards ?  

Cheers ;-)

- Original Message - 
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2003 9:29 AM


 I think it needs an index. ;-)
 
 
 -Original Message-
 Paul Baumgartel
 Sent: Monday, December 08, 2003 3:44 PM
 To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
 
 somewhat on the longish side???
 
 I'd hate to see a long article!  ;-)
 
 
 --- Richard Foote [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  Hi Yong,
  
  Saying there are a few errors is being a little kind to Don's 
  Inside Oracle Indexing article.
  
  In part, these are some of the issues I raised directly with Don in a 
  number of emails (warning somewhat on the longish side ;):
 -- 
 Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
 -- 
 Author: Orr, Steve
   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).
 


-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
-- 
Author: Richard Foote
  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).


RE: rebuilding indexes - sure to cause a ruckus

2003-12-09 Thread Jesse, Rich
This message's a keeper!  Thanks!  :)

Rich

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

-Original Message-
Sent: Monday, December 08, 2003 3:29 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L


Hi Yong,

Saying there are a few errors is being a little kind to Don's Inside
Oracle Indexing article.

[truncate drop storage]
-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
-- 
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).


RE: rebuilding indexes - sure to cause a ruckus

2003-12-09 Thread Jamadagni, Rajendra
Richard's explanation and example from c.d.o.s now has a permanent tinyurl link ... 
http://tinyurl.com/yflq if anyone is interested ... this might be better for bookmarks.

Raj

Rajendra dot Jamadagni at nospamespn dot com
All Views expressed in this email are strictly personal.
QOTD: Any clod can have facts, having an opinion is an art !


-Original Message-
Sent: Monday, December 08, 2003 4:29 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L


Hi Yong,

Saying there are a few errors is being a little kind to Don's Inside Oracle 
Indexing article.

[ rest snipped ]


**
This e-mail message is confidential, intended only for the named recipient(s) above 
and may contain information that is privileged, attorney work product or exempt from 
disclosure under applicable law. If you have received this message in error, or are 
not the named recipient(s), please immediately notify corporate MIS at (860) 766-2000 
and delete this e-mail message from your computer, Thank you.
**5
-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
-- 
Author: Jamadagni, Rajendra
  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).


RE: rebuilding indexes - sure to cause a ruckus

2003-12-09 Thread Pete Sharman
What sort of Oak Table member are you, Richard?  Any Oak Table member
worth their weight in toilet paper would certainly execute DBMS_POWERNAP
part way through, but the strong cup of coffee definitely needs a large
shot of whiskey substituted for it!  :)

Pete

Controlling developers is like herding cats.

Kevin Loney, Oracle DBA Handbook

Oh no, it's not.  It's much harder than that!

Bruce Pihlamae, long-term Oracle DBA


-Original Message-
Richard Foote
Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2003 7:35 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L

Hi Tanel,

I recommend a strong cup of coffee and a small nap 1/2 way through ;)


- Original Message - 
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2003 7:44 AM


Ouch, I gotta take a day off to read this one ;)







-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
-- 
Author: Richard Foote
  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).

-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
-- 
Author: Pete Sharman
  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).


Re: rebuilding indexes - sure to cause a ruckus

2003-12-09 Thread Yong Huang
Thanks, Richard. I'll read your long message more carefully later. I like your
statement that rebuilding an index or not is not rocket science. One needs to
measure the performance before and after the rebuild and make a conclusion
himself. Many times we discuss performance issues and get very technical and
sophisticated, without showing experimental results! Having been a science
researcher before, I'd like to emphasize that facts speak louder than theories.
There may be 10,000 24x7 databases in the world that don't easily allow even
testing an index rebuild. But there may be 100 times more production databases
in the world that are not 24x7. The individual DBA needs to do his control
study and conclude, using experts' opinions as reference.

Yong Huang



__
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/
-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
-- 
Author: Yong Huang
  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).


Re: rebuilding indexes - sure to cause a ruckus

2003-12-09 Thread Jared . Still

And in case you miss it in Richard's terse message, one of the big reasons that it 
is not 'rocket science' is that you can perform operations that modify the index(es),
and perform block dumps of the index as you go.  You can see exactly what Oracle is
doing with the index.

Jared








Yong Huang [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
12/09/2003 11:44 AM
Please respond to ORACLE-L


To:Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject:Re: rebuilding indexes - sure to cause a ruckus


Thanks, Richard. I'll read your long message more carefully later. I like your
statement that rebuilding an index or not is not rocket science. One needs to
measure the performance before and after the rebuild and make a conclusion
himself. Many times we discuss performance issues and get very technical and
sophisticated, without showing experimental results! Having been a science
researcher before, I'd like to emphasize that facts speak louder than theories.
There may be 10,000 24x7 databases in the world that don't easily allow even
testing an index rebuild. But there may be 100 times more production databases
in the world that are not 24x7. The individual DBA needs to do his control
study and conclude, using experts' opinions as reference.

Yong Huang



__
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/
-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
-- 
Author: Yong Huang
 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).




RE: rebuilding indexes - sure to cause a ruckus

2003-12-09 Thread Cary Millsap
Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts. --Richard Feynman


Cary Millsap
Hotsos Enterprises, Ltd.
http://www.hotsos.com

Upcoming events:
- Performance Diagnosis 101: 12/16 Detroit, 1/27 Atlanta
- SQL Optimization 101: 12/8 Dallas, 2/16 Dallas
- Hotsos Symposium 2004: March 7-10 Dallas
- Visit www.hotsos.com for schedule details...


-Original Message-
Yong Huang
Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2003 1:45 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L

Thanks, Richard. I'll read your long message more carefully later. I
like your
statement that rebuilding an index or not is not rocket science. One
needs to
measure the performance before and after the rebuild and make a
conclusion
himself. Many times we discuss performance issues and get very technical
and
sophisticated, without showing experimental results! Having been a
science
researcher before, I'd like to emphasize that facts speak louder than
theories.
There may be 10,000 24x7 databases in the world that don't easily allow
even
testing an index rebuild. But there may be 100 times more production
databases
in the world that are not 24x7. The individual DBA needs to do his
control
study and conclude, using experts' opinions as reference.

Yong Huang



__
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/
-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
-- 
Author: Yong Huang
  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).

-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
-- 
Author: Cary Millsap
  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).


RE: rebuilding indexes - sure to cause a ruckus

2003-12-09 Thread Bobak, Mark



Shh!! Nonsense! It's all black magic and conjecture! 
How else are we going to be highly paid Oracle consultants, if everyone knows 
all this stuff is provable and demonstrable?? ;-)

  -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2003 
  5:15 PMTo: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-LSubject: 
  Re: rebuilding indexes - sure to cause a ruckusAnd in case you miss it in Richard's terse message, one 
  of the big reasons that it is not 
  'rocket science' is that you can perform operations that modify the 
  index(es), and perform block dumps of 
  the index as you go.  You can see exactly what Oracle is 
  doing with the index. Jared 
  


  
  Yong Huang 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
12/09/2003 11:44 AM 
Please respond to ORACLE-L 
  To:   
 Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] cc:

 Subject:Re: rebuilding indexes - sure 
to cause a ruckusThanks, Richard. I'll read your long message more 
  carefully later. I like yourstatement that rebuilding an index or not is 
  not rocket science. One needs tomeasure the performance before and after 
  the rebuild and make a conclusionhimself. Many times we discuss 
  performance issues and get very technical andsophisticated, without 
  showing experimental results! Having been a scienceresearcher before, I'd 
  like to emphasize that facts speak louder than theories.There may be 
  10,000 24x7 databases in the world that don't easily allow eventesting an 
  index rebuild. But there may be 100 times more production databasesin the 
  world that are not 24x7. The individual DBA needs to do his controlstudy 
  and conclude, using experts' opinions as reference.Yong 
  Huang__Do you 
  Yahoo!?New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and 
  sharing.http://photos.yahoo.com/-- Please see the official 
  ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net-- Author: Yong 
  HuangINET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Fat City Network Services  
  -- 858-538-5051 http://www.fatcity.comSan Diego, California  
-- Mailing list and web hosting 
  services-To 
  REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail messageto: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and inthe message 
  BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L(or the name of mailing 
  list you want to be removed from). You mayalso send the HELP command 
  for other information (like 
subscribing).


Re: rebuilding indexes - sure to cause a ruckus

2003-12-08 Thread Tanel Poder
Hi!

Yes Yong I agree with you, that rebuilding may be beneficial in some cases,
especially some tables/indexes become either logically or physically read
only (btw, I was not speaking about coalescing in my post, it's a different
story anyway).

But the point I wanted to make is that single query's speed (LIO amount)
right after rebuilding index doesn't usually give us enough information to
determine whether overall system speed will go better in long term. When you
have rebuilt an index, it becomes more compact, causing more recursive
operations for block splits and perhaps index height changes in the future.
Also, in heavily loaded 24x7 environments with no real low-peak time, the
additional CPU, IO and brief exclusive lock usage may cause more harm than
it gives benefit. And often this benefit is only short term in regular OLTP
systems.

But in some cases, as when you've deleted a number of rows from your table
or done a lot of updates and you never expect these keys to be back in the
index, a rebuild can be justified.

Tanel.

- Original Message - 
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 05, 2003 10:29 PM


 Tanel,

 I think you're saying a query almost always runs faster right after the
index
 rebuild and there's no point in finding the criterion whether to rebuild
an
 index. (What is 42?)

 Some time ago I posted a message somewhere else showing a case where
rebuilding
 or coalescing an index may be benefitial. A data warehouse is found to
have
 some data errors. Deletes and updates are done. Then the database goes to
 mostly read-only again, and will last for a month or quarter. Then
shrinking
 frequently used B*Tree indexes is a good idea. Now I'd like to add one
more
 criterion as a result of reading Jonathan Lewis' dbazine article and email
with
 him (errors are mine): the index is full scanned, or if range scanned or
unique
 scanned, the index selectivity has to be fairly low (but not too low for
the
 index to be ignored by CBO).

 In a typical working environment, a data warehouse does have plenty of
 relatively quiet period. I worked on a monthly data load project at an
 insurance company. I remember we rebuilt a partitioned IOT (one partition
at a
 time) and fast full index scan (certain partitions) did run faster.

 There're some errors in Don Burleson's dbazine article (e.g. pct_used in
 dba_indexes) and Mike Hordila's Oramag article (structurally unbalanced
index).
 But one thing alluded to in there is important: study Oracle performance
 problems as scientific research. You said setting _wait_for_sync to false
 improves performance. That's a fact. We can only explain and analyze it
but not
 deny it. Similarly, when Mike says queries run 10 to 50% faster after
index
 rebuild, we can't deny unless we find his measurement is wrong. Wouldn't
it be
 nice if Oracle researchers write articles with sections like Abstract -
 Experimental - Results - Discussion in that order?

 Yong Huang

 Tanel Poder wrote:

 There's no point of arguing about whether a query ran faster right after
you
 rebuilt your index. Nor there is no point in finding some ultimate
algorithm
 for finding the point of index rebuilding, we all know the answer - it's
 42.

 Instead, a long stress test has to be done, e.g. running 10 millions of
 continous transactions and queries (simulating real life). Do one 10M
 without rebuilding indexes in the meantime, measure total execution time,
IO
 amount, CPU usage, segment sizes etc.

 Then restore your database back to starting point and do the same test
again
 with regular index rebuilds during the operations (online or taking
users
 offline, depending on environment type). And then measure the same
 statistics, especially total execution time. Note, that statistics and
time
 also for rebuilding indexes should be accounted in totals, because in real
 life they don't just disappear somewhere as in some simple-minded tests.

 Tanel.

 __
 Do you Yahoo!?
 Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
 http://companion.yahoo.com/
 -- 
 Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
 -- 
 Author: Yong Huang
   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).



-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
-- 
Author: Tanel Poder
  INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

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

Re: rebuilding indexes - sure to cause a ruckus

2003-12-08 Thread Tanel Poder
Ouch, I gotta take a day off to read this one ;)

Tanel.

- Original Message - 
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 08, 2003 11:29 PM


 Hi Yong,

 Saying there are a few errors is being a little kind to Don's Inside
 Oracle Indexing article.

 In part, these are some of the issues I raised directly with Don in a
number
 of emails (warning somewhat on the longish side ;):
   a.. There are no such things as star indexes. Star joins, yes, star
 transformations yes, but not star indexes ?
   b.. I still disagree with your description of b-tree indexes being
complex
 and difficult to understand, but then again this could just be my personal
 perception (check out

http://groups.google.com/groups?q=g:thl3498916429ddq=hl=enlr=ie=UTF-8se
 lm=ant%259.39604%24jM5.100537%40newsfeeds.bigpond.comrnum=47 where I have
a
 sample demo on how to investigate the workings of b-tree indexes.)
However,
 by understanding them and a how they function, the question of whether or
 not they need rebuilding no longer needs to be debated. It becomes easily
 apparent under what conditions indexes could benefit from a rebuild. I'll
 expand on this later but I would suggest those that debate, those that
 really don't know when a rebuild is justified and just rebuild in the hope
 it might do some good are those that really don't understand how indexes
 function. Knowledge is the key that unlocks the door of doubt and those
 without the key fumble aimlessly and prod around in hope...
   c.. Your subsequent quote There is enough anecdotal evidence that index
 rebuilding has helped some systems perform better, and I also have no
doubt
 that there is no scientific basis for the claim is a nonsense. Of course
 one explain in scientific terms such performance improvements, I can only
 suggest that you unfortunately can't. Oracle is not some magic piece of
 software and it doesn't run on some magical pieces of hardware. Any
 suggestions to the contrary are not helpful to anyone.
   d.. I still disagree with the double the block size, halving the logical
 reads must be a good thing argument. It's a path that could lead to a very
 disappointing conclusion (read cliff edge). Indexes prefer large block
sizes
 true but if the underlining storage file-system is not tuned to read (or
 write) these larger block sizes efficiently, then the whole thing is
counter
 productive. You've been warned ...
   e.. Your description of PCTUSED is still wrong. There is no PCTUSED for
 indexes so it really shouldn't be misleading to confuse a non-existing
index
 attribute with the amount of used space as documented in INDEX_STATS...
   f.. Including in your criteria for rebuilding an index btree_space
being
 greater than a block  is redundant when listed with the other criteria.
It
 is fundamentally impossible for an index with 4 levels or more to consist
of
 a single block, so why mention it. It just adds confusion and is silly.
The
 DBA who swears by this criteria (which I noticed has changed in this draft
 ;), how do they make such a claim? It's one thing to swear, it's quite
 another to prove. Your table that lists average rows and blocks per
 different index levels shows that those indexes with a leaf row length of
 500,000,000 and with 100,000 blocks require 4 levels. How does rebuilding
 such indexes with no subsequent change in index level improve performance
?
 I mean, large indexes need more levels right, so rebuilding them all the
 time and keeping the levels unchanged only to rebuild them again because
 they're still 4 or more levels seems like a pointless, never-ending
exercise
 in futility. To rebuild an index that actually results in a reduction in
 it's level generally requires a drastic reduction in it's data volume
due
 to the orders of sizing magnitude that a new level represents. More on
this
 and the other so-called rebuild criteria later but the current level of an
 index is not a criteria for a rebuild. A level 3 index could conceivably
be
 rebuilt to just a level 1 (if there were heaps and heaps of deletions) and
a
 level 5 index could be rebuilt to stay at level 5. Which index has
 benefited .
   g.. Criteria for a rebuild: or the total length of deleted is  1 block
 makes no sense whatsoever. Nearly all indexes would have a total length of
 deleted  than 1 block meaning nearly all indexes need rebuilding. I don't
 think so ...
   h.. Your discussion on the clustering factor affecting the likelihood of
 requiring an index rebuild is still flawed, however interestingly, you've
 now given an example on why this is the case. However, you've still come
to
 the wrong conclusion !! Firstly, you're incorrect in your example to say
 that a 1,000,000 row table with a clustering factor of 1,000,000 has it's
 rows in the same order as it's index although I guess this could be a
typo.
 Regardless, if you delete all last_name beginning with a K, you are going
to
 delete consecutive leaf nodes 

Re: rebuilding indexes - sure to cause a ruckus

2003-12-08 Thread Richard Foote
Hi Yong,

Saying there are a few errors is being a little kind to Don's Inside
Oracle Indexing article.

In part, these are some of the issues I raised directly with Don in a number
of emails (warning somewhat on the longish side ;):
  a.. There are no such things as star indexes. Star joins, yes, star
transformations yes, but not star indexes ?
  b.. I still disagree with your description of b-tree indexes being complex
and difficult to understand, but then again this could just be my personal
perception (check out
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=g:thl3498916429ddq=hl=enlr=ie=UTF-8se
lm=ant%259.39604%24jM5.100537%40newsfeeds.bigpond.comrnum=47 where I have a
sample demo on how to investigate the workings of b-tree indexes.)  However,
by understanding them and a how they function, the question of whether or
not they need rebuilding no longer needs to be debated. It becomes easily
apparent under what conditions indexes could benefit from a rebuild. I'll
expand on this later but I would suggest those that debate, those that
really don't know when a rebuild is justified and just rebuild in the hope
it might do some good are those that really don't understand how indexes
function. Knowledge is the key that unlocks the door of doubt and those
without the key fumble aimlessly and prod around in hope...
  c.. Your subsequent quote There is enough anecdotal evidence that index
rebuilding has helped some systems perform better, and I also have no doubt
that there is no scientific basis for the claim is a nonsense. Of course
one explain in scientific terms such performance improvements, I can only
suggest that you unfortunately can't. Oracle is not some magic piece of
software and it doesn't run on some magical pieces of hardware. Any
suggestions to the contrary are not helpful to anyone.
  d.. I still disagree with the double the block size, halving the logical
reads must be a good thing argument. It's a path that could lead to a very
disappointing conclusion (read cliff edge). Indexes prefer large block sizes
true but if the underlining storage file-system is not tuned to read (or
write) these larger block sizes efficiently, then the whole thing is counter
productive. You've been warned ...
  e.. Your description of PCTUSED is still wrong. There is no PCTUSED for
indexes so it really shouldn't be misleading to confuse a non-existing index
attribute with the amount of used space as documented in INDEX_STATS...
  f.. Including in your criteria for rebuilding an index btree_space being
greater than a block  is redundant when listed with the other criteria. It
is fundamentally impossible for an index with 4 levels or more to consist of
a single block, so why mention it. It just adds confusion and is silly. The
DBA who swears by this criteria (which I noticed has changed in this draft
;), how do they make such a claim? It's one thing to swear, it's quite
another to prove. Your table that lists average rows and blocks per
different index levels shows that those indexes with a leaf row length of
500,000,000 and with 100,000 blocks require 4 levels. How does rebuilding
such indexes with no subsequent change in index level improve performance ?
I mean, large indexes need more levels right, so rebuilding them all the
time and keeping the levels unchanged only to rebuild them again because
they're still 4 or more levels seems like a pointless, never-ending exercise
in futility. To rebuild an index that actually results in a reduction in
it's level generally requires a drastic reduction in it's data volume due
to the orders of sizing magnitude that a new level represents. More on this
and the other so-called rebuild criteria later but the current level of an
index is not a criteria for a rebuild. A level 3 index could conceivably be
rebuilt to just a level 1 (if there were heaps and heaps of deletions) and a
level 5 index could be rebuilt to stay at level 5. Which index has
benefited .
  g.. Criteria for a rebuild: or the total length of deleted is  1 block
makes no sense whatsoever. Nearly all indexes would have a total length of
deleted  than 1 block meaning nearly all indexes need rebuilding. I don't
think so ...
  h.. Your discussion on the clustering factor affecting the likelihood of
requiring an index rebuild is still flawed, however interestingly, you've
now given an example on why this is the case. However, you've still come to
the wrong conclusion !! Firstly, you're incorrect in your example to say
that a 1,000,000 row table with a clustering factor of 1,000,000 has it's
rows in the same order as it's index although I guess this could be a typo.
Regardless, if you delete all last_name beginning with a K, you are going to
delete consecutive leaf nodes regardless of the clustering factor. So what
difference does it make to the index. None. To the table, yes, you either
delete rows from all differing blocks or rows from a small number of blocks
but to the index, it makes no difference, hence your claim makes no 

Re: rebuilding indexes - sure to cause a ruckus

2003-12-08 Thread Vladimir Begun
Tanel Poder wrote:
Ouch, I gotta take a day off to read this one ;)
http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html

It's all about optimization...
--
Vladimir Begun
The statements and opinions expressed here are my own and
do not necessarily represent those of Oracle Corporation.
--
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
--
Author: Vladimir Begun
 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).


Re: rebuilding indexes - sure to cause a ruckus

2003-12-08 Thread Paul Baumgartel
somewhat on the longish side???

I'd hate to see a long article!  ;-)




--- Richard Foote [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Hi Yong,
 
 Saying there are a few errors is being a little kind to Don's
 Inside
 Oracle Indexing article.
 
 In part, these are some of the issues I raised directly with Don in a
 number
 of emails (warning somewhat on the longish side ;):


__
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/
-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
-- 
Author: Paul Baumgartel
  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).


RE: rebuilding indexes - sure to cause a ruckus

2003-12-08 Thread Orr, Steve
I think it needs an index. ;-)


-Original Message-
Paul Baumgartel
Sent: Monday, December 08, 2003 3:44 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L

somewhat on the longish side???

I'd hate to see a long article!  ;-)


--- Richard Foote [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Hi Yong,
 
 Saying there are a few errors is being a little kind to Don's 
 Inside Oracle Indexing article.
 
 In part, these are some of the issues I raised directly with Don in a 
 number of emails (warning somewhat on the longish side ;):
-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
-- 
Author: Orr, Steve
  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).


Re: rebuilding indexes - sure to cause a ruckus

2003-12-05 Thread Yong Huang
Tanel,

I think you're saying a query almost always runs faster right after the index
rebuild and there's no point in finding the criterion whether to rebuild an
index. (What is 42?)

Some time ago I posted a message somewhere else showing a case where rebuilding
or coalescing an index may be benefitial. A data warehouse is found to have
some data errors. Deletes and updates are done. Then the database goes to
mostly read-only again, and will last for a month or quarter. Then shrinking
frequently used B*Tree indexes is a good idea. Now I'd like to add one more
criterion as a result of reading Jonathan Lewis' dbazine article and email with
him (errors are mine): the index is full scanned, or if range scanned or unique
scanned, the index selectivity has to be fairly low (but not too low for the
index to be ignored by CBO).

In a typical working environment, a data warehouse does have plenty of
relatively quiet period. I worked on a monthly data load project at an
insurance company. I remember we rebuilt a partitioned IOT (one partition at a
time) and fast full index scan (certain partitions) did run faster.

There're some errors in Don Burleson's dbazine article (e.g. pct_used in
dba_indexes) and Mike Hordila's Oramag article (structurally unbalanced index).
But one thing alluded to in there is important: study Oracle performance
problems as scientific research. You said setting _wait_for_sync to false
improves performance. That's a fact. We can only explain and analyze it but not
deny it. Similarly, when Mike says queries run 10 to 50% faster after index
rebuild, we can't deny unless we find his measurement is wrong. Wouldn't it be
nice if Oracle researchers write articles with sections like Abstract -
Experimental - Results - Discussion in that order?

Yong Huang

Tanel Poder wrote:

There's no point of arguing about whether a query ran faster right after you
rebuilt your index. Nor there is no point in finding some ultimate algorithm
for finding the point of index rebuilding, we all know the answer - it's
42.

Instead, a long stress test has to be done, e.g. running 10 millions of
continous transactions and queries (simulating real life). Do one 10M
without rebuilding indexes in the meantime, measure total execution time, IO
amount, CPU usage, segment sizes etc.

Then restore your database back to starting point and do the same test again
with regular index rebuilds during the operations (online or taking users
offline, depending on environment type). And then measure the same
statistics, especially total execution time. Note, that statistics and time
also for rebuilding indexes should be accounted in totals, because in real
life they don't just disappear somewhere as in some simple-minded tests.

Tanel.

__
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/
-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
-- 
Author: Yong Huang
  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).


rebuilding indexes - sure to cause a ruckus

2003-12-04 Thread Jared . Still


http://www.dbazine.com/burleson18.shtml


RE: rebuilding indexes - sure to cause a ruckus

2003-12-04 Thread Jesse, Rich
Wow.  We've got a lot of indexes to rebuild...  :)

Seems like those criteria have been beaten up on this list before.


Rich

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

-Original Message-
Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 1:55 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L




http://www.dbazine.com/burleson18.shtml 
-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
-- 
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).


Re: rebuilding indexes - sure to cause a ruckus

2003-12-04 Thread Tanel Poder
There's no point of arguing about whether a query ran faster right after you
rebuilt your index. Nor there is no point in finding some ultimate algorithm
for finding the point of index rebuilding, we all know the answer - it's
42.

Instead, a long stress test has to be done, e.g. running 10 millions of
continous transactions and queries (simulating real life). Do one 10M
without rebuilding indexes in the meantime, measure total execution time, IO
amount, CPU usage, segment sizes etc.

Then restore your database back to starting point and do the same test again
with regular index rebuilds during the operations (online or taking users
offline, depending on environment type). And then measure the same
statistics, especially total execution time. Note, that statistics and time
also for rebuilding indexes should be accounted in totals, because in real
life they don't just disappear somewhere as in some simple-minded tests.

Tanel.



- Original Message - 
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 9:54 PM




http://www.dbazine.com/burleson18.shtml


-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
-- 
Author: Tanel Poder
  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).


RE: rebuilding indexes - sure to cause a ruckus

2003-12-04 Thread Rognes, Sten

Thanks,
Added this one to my bookmarks along with

http://www.oracle.com/oramag/webcolumns/2001/index.html?auto_index.html
and 
http://www.dba-oracle.com/art_index1.htm


Sten ;)


-Original Message-
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 11:55 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L




http://www.dbazine.com/burleson18.shtml 
-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
-- 
Author: Rognes, Sten
  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).


Re: rebuilding indexes - sure to cause a ruckus

2003-12-04 Thread Jonathan Lewis

Comments in-line

Regards

Jonathan Lewis
http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk

  The educated person is not the person 
  who can answer the questions, but the 
  person who can question the answers -- T. Schick Jr


One-day tutorials:
http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/tutorial.html


Three-day seminar:
see http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/seminar.html
UK___November


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


- Original Message - 
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 9:04 PM


 Instead, a long stress test has to be done, e.g. running 10 millions of
 continous transactions and queries (simulating real life). 

No ! No ! No ! No !
real life is what happens outside Oracle databases.

 

-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
-- 
Author: Jonathan Lewis
  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).