Tablespace/Datafile configurations
DBAsupport.com Forums - Powered by vBulletin
Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Tablespace/Datafile configurations

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    343

    Tablespace/Datafile configurations

    Hi all, Our database is currently 4GB and we are projecting it to grow to 40GB end of next year. What is the best way to allocate the tablespace/datafile config for this.

    Current config is : we have 4 mount points and
    1 - system
    2 - Redo
    3 - Data - with single datafile of maxsize 8GB
    4 - Index - with single datafile of maxsize 8GB

    Would it be better to add more datafiles to the existing tablepsace mount points or is it better to distribute the datafiles acorss the mount points in a round-robin fashion ?

    Thanks.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    England
    Posts
    7,331
    spread all files across as many spindles as you can. Evenly distribute your I/O and if you can keep redo on their own separate very fast file system

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    ATLANTA, GA, USA
    Posts
    3,136
    How many physical disks are in the server?
    Did you use RAID?

    Tamil

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    over the hill and through the woods
    Posts
    995
    Originally posted by tamilselvan
    How many physical disks are in the server?
    Did you use RAID?

    Tamil
    What's RAID isn't that some kind of insect killer? That's not very nice messing with people like that Tamil.
    Oracle it's not just a database it's a lifestyle!
    --------------
    BTW....You need to get a girlfriend who's last name isn't .jpg

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Jolo, Sulu
    Posts
    639
    Wow im surprised Oradoc u also have RAID in ur place, but i prefer
    BAYGON. its effective

    Hi Dears.
    Just curious about this I/O striping accross spindles performance
    strategy.

    Say I have two servers A & B.(same O/S win2k).

    Server A have six (6) hard disks of capacity 20G each = total 120G.
    Server B have one (1) hard disks of capacity 120g = total 120g.

    Assuming that I filled up both servers disk spaces will data, which
    one will perform better? Considering that those 20g-size disk is
    much slower than the 120g-size disk.


    Thanks
    Last edited by kris123; 04-27-2005 at 04:22 AM.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    343
    Originally posted by tamilselvan
    How many physical disks are in the server?
    Did you use RAID?

    Tamil
    We are using NetApp servers and there are 5 disks.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    greenwich.ct.us
    Posts
    9,095
    Originally posted by rshivagami
    We are using NetApp servers and there are 5 disks.
    IMHO, the more relavent question is how are your LVMs setup across those disks? Also, what's your RAID level?
    Jeff Hunter
    marist89@yahoo.com
    http://marist89.blogspot.com/
    Get Firefox!
    "I pledge to stop eating sharks fin soup and will not do so under any circumstances."

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Colorado Springs
    Posts
    5,253
    Originally posted by kris123
    Wow im surprised Oradoc u also have RAID in ur place, but i prefer
    BAYGON. its effective

    Hi Dears.
    Just curious about this I/O striping accross spindles performance
    strategy.

    Say I have two servers A & B.(same O/S win2k).

    Server A have six (6) hard disks of capacity 20G each = total 120G.
    Server B have one (1) hard disks of capacity 120g = total 120g.

    Assuming that I filled up both servers disk spaces will data, which
    one will perform better? Considering that those 20g-size disk is
    much slower than the 120g-size disk.


    Thanks
    All things being equal the array of 20Gb disks would perform better .. more bandwidth, more spindles, more heads etc.

    Of course if the 20Gb drives were very old and crappy then things might be different, but in general "more & smaller" beats "fewer & bigger".
    David Aldridge,
    "The Oracle Sponge"

    Senior Manager, Business Intelligence Development
    XM Satellite Radio
    Washington, DC

    Oracle ACE

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    ATLANTA, GA, USA
    Posts
    3,136
    Since you have 5 disks only, my suggestion is use RAID 0 - Striping alone. Simple striping across 5 disks at about 64K or 128K per disk (stripe unit size) is probably the best way of minimizing I/O contention.
    Create fewer mount points. Other wise, later you will find that one mount point will be more heavily used than others.

    Tamil

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Makati, Philippines
    Posts
    857
    Originally posted by rshivagami
    Hi all, Our database is currently 4GB and we are projecting it to grow to 40GB end of next year. What is the best way to allocate the tablespace/datafile config for this.

    Current config is : we have 4 mount points and
    1 - system
    2 - Redo
    3 - Data - with single datafile of maxsize 8GB
    4 - Index - with single datafile of maxsize 8GB

    Would it be better to add more datafiles to the existing tablepsace mount points or is it better to distribute the datafiles acorss the mount points in a round-robin fashion ?

    Thanks.
    Your current config looks just fine. But in the end its the actual I/O that needs to be monitor. If you see improper I/O distribution then might need to move data files from 1 disk to the other or your subsequent addition of data files will be considered. And assuming that your mount points are for each disk. But this is only effective when no RAIDs implementation, do you have one?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  



Click Here to Expand Forum to Full Width