Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
Database Servers
DB2InformixIngresMS SQLOraclePervasive.SQLPostgreSQLProgressSybase
Desktop Databases
FileMakerFoxProMS AccessParadox
General
General DB TopicsDatabase Theory
Related Topics
Java Development.NET DevelopmentVB DevelopmentMore Topics ...

Database Forum / Informix Topics / July 2003

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

oracle cache fusion against informix XPS?

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
utkanbir - 31 Jul 2003 07:03 GMT
Hi Gurus,

I was an Informix man , but my last job needs Oracle skills which i
have no experience. My question is about oracle real application
clusters. I know that
oracle's shared everything architecture uses Dlm (distributed lock
manager ) and for large installations this was a problem. But all the
oracle white papers say this was history. Their cache fusion tech.
solved all the problems.
Is there any one who can comment on this?

Kind Regards,
hope
A Blonde - 31 Jul 2003 12:08 GMT
Hi Gurus,

I was an Informix man , but my last job needs Oracle skills which i
have no experience. My question is about oracle real application
clusters. I know that
oracle's shared everything architecture uses Dlm (distributed lock
manager ) and for large installations this was a problem. But all the
oracle white papers say this was history. Their cache fusion tech.
solved all the problems.
Is there any one who can comment on this?

Hi ho, hi ho, it's off to troll we go...

Have you tried an Oracle group dude?

AB

Signature

__________________________________________________________
Sign-up for your own FREE Personalized E-mail at Mail.com
http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup

CareerBuilder.com has over 400,000 jobs. Be smarter about your job search
http://corp.mail.com/careers

sending to informix-list

Mark Townsend - 31 Jul 2003 16:31 GMT
> Is there any one who can comment on this?

Sure - here to help :-)

The DLM was never really that big a problem, although people liked to
think it was. The real issue was as follows

Setup
-----
Block A on disk
Block A loaded into memory on Node 1
Block A loaded into memory on Node 2
Change to Block A in memory on Node 1
Change or Read of Block A in Memory on Node 2 requires a synchronization

Previous Behaviour
------------------
1) Node 1 would write changed block to disk
2) Node 2 would read changed block from disk for the query
This was known as a 'ping', and IO could quickly become a bottle neck if
you didn't design your app to reduce the number of cross node 'pings' of
data. And after the re-design, you would need to then partition your
data to make the design work

Now, with Cache Fusion
----------------------
1) Node 1 pokes the changed block from it's memory to Node 2's memory
No IO, no need to re-design app, partition data etc
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2009 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.