Dec 5: UKOUG Day 3
Marco Gralike chaired the session and was good enough to bring a gift of this little chap.

Apparently he was keeping him awake all night by watching MTV in Marco's hotel room. I didn't really understand this story properly until later on Wednesday night when the little guy spent all night watching MTV in *my* room
I was unusually pleased with my "Performance Tuning Basics" presentation. It was definitely a push squeezing it into 45 minutes as best I could and there were definitely a couple of things that didn't go as I'd hoped but, fundamentally, it was one of those good days. It was an introductory presentation and so it was difficult to go into anything in too much depth, but I think that sometimes it's the basic approach that people get wrong, rather than the technical stuff and that was the main message I wanted to get across. One problem was that I had a good couple of demos which would have helped reinforced some of the points, but there just wasn't enough time. Another was that I'd planned to promote the DBA 2.0 session after mine because I knew those guys would show some of the Performance Pages in DB/Grid Control that I didn't have time to show. Although I'd checked this before the presentation, I only remembered when they came on stage at the end to set up. Graham Wood and JB were very nice about my presentation, though, which was comforting as they're two of the guys who design this stuff! In fact, later that evening, people kept coming up to me to tell me that they had both been very positive about my session during their own, which I was really pleased to hear. Maybe I should have attended DBA 2.0? Actually, hearing Marco's verdict afterwards, maybe not! I'll leave it to Marco to put his money where his mouth is
There was one other small correction that Niall Litchfield pointed out to me post-presentation. I think he's right, but I'm going to check it out at home before I upload the slides. (Updated later ... Niall was right. As described in 'Tales of the Oak Table', it was as a result of a problem with a benchmark, rather than a customer problem, that the wait instrumentation was introduced but I think I had the correct time-frame at least. I've replaced 'When faced with a customer problem ...' with 'When faced with a benchmark problem and uploaded the slides to the UKOUG website. Frankly they're very visual and content-light, though.)
A quick dash and I was off to listen to Steve Shaw of Intel talking about "Benchmarking Parallel Query Performance". I have a clear interest in the subject, both from a load-testing and PX perspective, so it was pretty interesting for me. I liked the closing line - 'Don't guess, test' - if I recall correctly, but my favourite bit was probably that he was another guy (like Eric Grancher yesterday) who had been able to test on Exadata. His findings on a TPC-H-like test (and it's very important to state that it's only a representation) using HammerOra was that Exadata produced a 5-10 times performance improvement over his Fibre-Channel SAN configuration and that it had changed the game completely for Oracle Data Warehouses. Now, whilst I hestitate to make such a bold, unqualified statement in a blog post, he was clearly very impressed, having actually worked with the thing. Maybe I'll need to go out busking (for a *long* time) to get the pennies together to buy one for my current client.
After that it was the main UKOUG party night but I'd have to say at the risk of sounding repetitive that the whole event seemed much quieter this year so it was a bit of a damp squib from my perspective so I didn't stay out too long because I had another presentation to prepare for in the morning. They announced the newly-appointed Directors whilst I was having a smoke outside but I heard that Lisa Dobson was voted in when I got back upstairs. Congratulations, Lisa
P.S. I had extremely sore calf muscles when I woke up on Wednesday morning. It took me about 30 seconds puzzling why that might be before I remembered running up and down stairs during James Morle's presentation!
#1 - Marco Gralike said:
2008-12-05 20:35 - (Reply)
I think he only looks MTV all the time, because he likes the women who are dancing on the TV all the time.
Did he already started to annoy you about that he wants to see a Celtic soccer game? Apparently that one of the reasons he didn't want to stay a my place.
I hope "Polly and the Boys" are nice to him and give him a warm welcome.
Grz
M.
#2 - Marco Gralike said:
2008-12-05 21:39 - (Reply)
How many typo's can you make.
Its time for a beer ![]()
#3 - Doug Burns said:
2008-12-07 02:28 - (Reply)
He has received a very warm welcome. After much discussion and discarding the obvious Leonard, Lennie, or Marco, Mario seems to be the name that's stuck with him.
Celtic play Hibernian tomorrow at Easter Road. Easter Road is in Edinburgh so I'm going to try to get him a ticket. If not, he can watch the first game live on TV with me ![]()
#4 - Hans Konings said:
2008-12-07 09:07 - (Reply)
It's been a really cool meeting and I hope to see everyone again next time!
#5 - Kirhy Ram 2008-12-08 00:11 - (Reply)
Doug,
I enjoyed your presentation at UKOUG. Any plans to post the slids at the UKOUG website?
Regards,
Kirhy
#6 - Doug Burns said:
2008-12-08 07:54 - (Reply)
Kirhy,
I uploaded the performance presentation the other day but it doesn't seem to be there yet.
The Audit Vault presentation will take a day or two while I fix a couple of mistakes in it.
Cheers,
Doug
#7 - David Aldridge said:
2008-12-10 17:54 - (Reply)
"His findings on a TPC-H-like test (and it's very important to state that it's only a representation) using HammerOra was that Exadata produced a 5-10 times performance improvement over his Fibre-Channel SAN configuration ..."
Ah, but the perspective we need is whether his Fibre-Channel SAN configuration was warehouse-appropriate or, as is usually the case, hopelessly inadequate. I fear that if his configuration is indeed warehouse-apropriate then a 5-10 scale improvement is drastically understating the potential improvements, and doing a great disservice to Exadata.
I think that there are a great many of us who would fancy our chances in a "How Hopelessly Inadequate is Your Storage Bandwidth?" competition.
#8 - Doug Burns said:
2008-12-10 18:01 - (Reply)
I think that there are a great many of us who would fancy our chances in a "How Hopelessly Inadequate is Your Storage Bandwidth?" competition.
LOL
Another example of why I try not to say too much about the content of presentations - not enough detail in there. However, I reckon if you were to email Steve you might have some joy in persuading him to discuss the configuration with you. (Actually, maybe that's what I should do, eh?)
I was encouraged by the overall impression he gave, but to the extent that I'd certainly want to be evaluating Exadata to see what the benefit was for us - no more than that.
#9 - David Aldridge said:
2008-12-10 18:04 - (Reply)
Yes, I think you should certainly do that!
Let me just say this. One hundred and forty megabytes per second. Total sustainable bandwidth when nobody else is running a query.
#10 - Kevin Closson said:
2008-12-11 17:40 - (Reply)
I'm glad to see people saying nice things about Exadata. However, in spite of the respect I have for Steve, it does nobody any good to through out figures like 5-10x over Fibre Channel SAN storage. The smallest Exadata config is 2 Exadata Storage Server, or 2GB/s. That would be 5x faster than a single 4Gb FC HBA. If Steve had a beta config (half rack) he would have measured 6GB/s which is 15 FC HBAs worth of throughput...I could see that being 5-10x faster than something, but something is very open ended.
I guess I'm just a stickler. I should be happy we have a fan club I suppose.
#11 - Kevin Closson said:
2008-12-11 17:42 - (Reply)
...uh, but not a stickler about typing blunders I see ![]()
#12 - Doug Burns said:
2008-12-11 21:13 - (Reply)
Kevin,
but something is very open ended.
Ah, when I saw your blog post last night ... ![]()
I'm super-busy and stuffed with the cold at the moment which means sluggish blog comments and sluggish, slightly-thrown-together blog posts too - days after the conference in some cases.
I did hesitate to throw those numbers in there, because there are so many factors to consider, as Dave highlighted above and you know I know.
5-10x is as stupid as 100-200x without any context or detail and a fan club that doesn't analyse results honestly is no fan club at all.
I think what I was trying to get across was the positive reaction Steve had to his tests and, as someone who is approaching a new DW implementation with trepidation, I think what I'd like most is for people to give Exadata a try with their system and their data and decide based on the numbers they achieve.
At the moment, I live in a world where 5-10x might be an persuasive number, even if the real factor turns out to be something completely different.
But thanks for calling me on it anyway and, when I saw your post last night, I chuckled to myself at the sense in what you were saying and the timeliness of it.
I haven't looked at your post closely enough to have a guess yet, though ...
#13 - Steve Shaw 2008-12-15 12:20 - (Reply)
Hi,
The initial summary of the presentation in the blog is fair. It is also important to note that this was a couple of slides in a 45 minutes presentation and the aim was to discuss one method of how to measure the performance of parallel query rather than a presentation on Exadata performance per se. In this context I also agree that "5-10x is as stupid as 100-200x without any context or detail" however in the Exadata ad printed in the back of the UKOUG guide the claim is "10X faster than your existing Data Warehouse" so I in some ways I was working within some sort of existing context ![]()
So, yes I am well aware that my test SAN is inadequate for an Oracle Data Warehouse (but so are many data warehouses out there), for the record it is a Clariion CX-320F and a 4Gbit HBA in the database server. However my aim was not to say Exadata is 5X,10X,100X faster than all FC SAN. My aim was as originally noted in the blog that "a 5X-10X performance improvement "over his (ie my) Fibre-Channel SAN configuration" showed a way in which I could quantify a parallel query performance difference.
Saying that I am still impressed by Exdatam, Of course your mileage may vary depending on what you already have so hopefully this supports my original aim of showing at least one way of how to test parallel queries.
#14 - Doug Burns said:
2008-12-15 15:58 - (Reply)
Steve,
Thanks for dropping by and adding a bit more detail than I did. I certainly didn't mean to criticise your claims, more my repetition of them without much info. That's the danger of, as you say, plucking out a couple of slides from a bigger presentation.
Cheers,
Doug


This involves two friends I've made over the past couple of years and a little guy starting out on a new career.I met Richard when I started working at my current site just under two years ago. Richard's been totally blind since childhood and it's be an
Tracked: Jan 24, 21:05