Tanel,
Oracle 9-2 SQL Ref manual. Lob storage clause.
The options for lobs on creation are:
CACHE
NO CACHE
CACHE READS
I don't think the last one appeared until 9.2
I was wrong about caching only writes, though -
one of the joys of trying to quote everything from
memory.
The CACHE
It's just one example of my general suggestion that messing about
with block sizes rarely has any direct performance benefit. But
if you can put something out of the way where it can't do so much
damage then the performance of everything else might benefit.
Regards
Jonathan Lewis
Hi Jonathan,
I don't think the last one appeared until 9.2
I was wrong about caching only writes, though -
one of the joys of trying to quote everything from
memory.
Thank you for this note, I had somehow missed this important improvement.
The CACHE READS option means that the
LOB goes
?
From: Jonathan Lewis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2004/01/30 Fri AM 04:09:25 EST
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Q] wait time /lob def
Tanel,
Oracle 9-2 SQL Ref manual. Lob storage clause.
The options for lobs on creation are:
CACHE
NO CACHE
: Jonathan Lewis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2004/01/30 Fri AM 04:09:25 EST
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Q] wait time /lob def
Tanel,
Oracle 9-2 SQL Ref manual. Lob storage clause.
The options for lobs on creation are:
CACHE
NO CACHE
Jonathan / Tanel:
I, however, AM having this problem. Didn't know where
to look till I saw this message. (I love this list!)
I've yet to capture the sid (and therefore track back
to the table) where the 'direct path write' occurs.
Definitions for the tables were supplied by the
vendor. When I
There is a note in one of the manuals about nologging
lobs (or nocache lob, I forget which) that points out
that the unrecoverable SCN for file that holds the
LOB has to be updated in the control file whenever the
LOB is updated.
If you actually have a performance problem because of
this - i.e.
That is an interesting use of an alternate block size Jonathan.
Jonathan Lewis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
01/29/2004 09:59 AM
Please respond to ORACLE-L
To:Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject:Re: [Q] wait time
Jonathan,
about which version are you talking here?
(You do also have the option in more recent versions
of refining the caching properties so the LOB can be
readcache only, writecache only or read/write cache
or nocache, I believe).
I haven't found a way to explicitly set read or write
Comments below.
- Original Message -
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2004 7:04 PM
Jonathan / Tanel:
I, however, AM having this problem. Didn't know where
to look till I saw this message. (I love this list!)
So do I ;)
I've
Thanks, Tanel.
Yes, I'll be at RMOUG.
I'll be in the front row for your presentation.
Again, thanks for the info.
Barb
--- Tanel Poder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Comments below.
- Original Message -
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January
11 matches
Mail list logo
