View Poll Results: What do you think about the article?
- Voters
- 6. You may not vote on this poll
-
Originally posted by gandolf989
DaPi, fess up! I bet you own a Citron! Either that or an AMC Gremlin!!!
Either way, you definitely seem like the bow tie type!!!
OK, if its "kiss and tell time":
I've never used a pocket protector. I often wear a bow tie, but only with DJ (smoking/tuxedo or whatever it's called in your part of the world) or tails. Moderate over-bite. 5'10" 70Kg. Hair thining but no bald patch yet - getting a bit grey around the temples. Previous car was an Irmscher Opel i200 (blissful engine/gear-box combination) . . . the one in process of reconstruction is a 1929 Riley "9", in the family since 1933.
The only Citroën I've driven was a 1923 model (I think). Very slow, very exciting because the accelerator and brake pedals were the other way round!
P.S. No I don't own a lemon 
P.P.S. I'll take this opportunity to plug a motor meeting arranged by a buddie each year: http://www.british-cars.ch/images2.html
Etrance free, 1'500 cars . . .
Last edited by DaPi; 04-16-2005 at 02:16 PM.
"The power of instruction is seldom of much efficacy except in those happy dispositions where it is almost superfluous" - Gibbon, quoted by R.P.Feynman
-
Originally posted by DaPi
OK, if its "kiss and tell time":
I've never used a pocket protector. I often wear a bow tie, but only with DJ (smoking/tuxedo or whatever it's called in your part of the world) or tails. Moderate over-bite. 5'10" 70Kg. Hair thining but no bald patch yet - getting a bit grey around the temples. Previous car was an Irmscher Opel i200 (blissful engine/gear-box combination) . . . the one in process of reconstruction is a 1929 Riley "9", in the family since 1933.
The only Citroën I've driven was a 1923 model (I think). Very slow, very exciting because the accelerator and brake pedals were the other way round!
P.S. No I don't own a lemon 
P.P.S. I'll take this opportunity to plug a motor meeting arranged by a buddie each year: http://www.british-cars.ch/images2.html
Etrance free, 1'500 cars . . .
Now this is a nice family car!
I don't know what a 1929 Riley "9" is, but can you post a picture?
-
larger block sizes
Nope, haven't had time to do the 32k trial, especially since I don't have a 64 bit server to play with (yet). As soon as I can I will look into it.
Mike
Michael R. Ault
Senior Consultant
Burleson Consulting
-
Originally posted by gandolf989
Don't know what a 1929 Riley "9" is, but can you post a picture?
None of these mine (it's in bits at the moment):
http://web.ukonline.co.uk/rileyrob/i...rer_pn3026.jpg
http://web.ukonline.co.uk/rileyrob/i...rer_vp8554.jpg
P.S. there was a racing "9" - some people still race them: http://web.ukonline.co.uk/rileyrob/i...pec_ww9736.jpg
OUCH!
Last edited by DaPi; 04-16-2005 at 03:47 PM.
"The power of instruction is seldom of much efficacy except in those happy dispositions where it is almost superfluous" - Gibbon, quoted by R.P.Feynman
-
Re: larger block sizes
Originally posted by mikerault
Nope, haven't had time to do the 32k trial, especially since I don't have a 64 bit server to play with (yet). As soon as I can I will look into it.
Mike
Do you think that there could be a problem with an article that over generalizes a rule of thumb?
-
Re: larger block sizes
Originally posted by mikerault
Nope, haven't had time to do the 32k trial, especially since I don't have a 64 bit server to play with (yet). As soon as I can I will look into it.
Mike
One other thing about Mikes "Rules" for large blocksizes paper. He says
This is very true. All temp segment access is sequential and 32k blocksizes greatly reduce logical I/O and disk sort times. I'm working an a benchmark right now that shows a one-third speed improvement of disk sorts in a 32k vs. an 8k blocksize.
Mike, thought you were working on that benchmark for a while. but anyway, can you explain what that paragraph means?
Why is it better to read
4x32k blocks for 128k versus
16x8k blocks for 128k
since temp is read just using multi-block IO's like a full scan? It reads N kb of information, it does not read a block (so, it boils down to 6 one way and 1/2 dozen the other, we read 128k -- or Nk in general)
And also, since TEMP does not do LIO at all, what is the comment about LIO? what does that mean exactly.
See this posting for the entire discussion.
Last edited by TomKyte; 04-16-2005 at 04:08 PM.
-
Originally posted by TomKyte
Now, I'm just hoping my wife doesn't google me to see what I've been up to now.... [/B]
May be she has and waiting for the right moment
There are three kinds of lies: Lies, damned lies, and benchmarks...
Unix is user friendly. It's just very particular about who it's friends are.
Oracle DBA
-
Thats the car I have hired for my wedding later in the year!!
Assistance is Futile...
-
Re: Re: larger block sizes
Originally posted by TomKyte
since temp is read just using multi-block IO's like a full scan? It reads N kb of information, it does not read a block (so, it boils down to 6 one way and 1/2 dozen the other, we read 128k -- or Nk in general)
And also, since TEMP does not do LIO at all, what is the comment about LIO? what does that mean exactly.
See this posting for the entire discussion.
Don't hold your breath ... I asked Mike about this on Mar 8th http://dba.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=1239&st=30
-
Re: Re: Re: larger block sizes
Watch out or he'll take you to task
Based on that I'm sure he'll be back to answer.
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
Click Here to Expand Forum to Full Width
|