Twitter Updates 2.2.1: FeedWitter

Saturday, June 18, 2011

Exadata presentations

Well, I'm finally getting my exadata presentations up on my blog.  I will give a synopsis of it so you can decide if you want to look through them.. I also included a some screenshots that are meaningless without some background.

Hardware  (download)

My conclusion on hardware is that the exadata is merely off the shelf hardware.  Yes putting together the hardware in the exadata configuration (with storage cells, and infiniband) does greatly improve performance over most "normal" configurations that use arrays (like Hitachi, IBM, EMC, etc. etc.) over Fiber.

You can build your own server/storage that is even faster using SSD over infininband and you can customize it to your needs balancing the storage and database for YOUR NEEDS.

Software (download)

This is where the solution shines.  As I said above you can build the hardware yourself, but the gain is in the software.. In my test case I took a 276gb table with 1.7billion rows, and scanned it in under a second by combining HCC, storage indexes and flashcache.  Pretty incredible (it only used 6gb of disk space too).

However, the more your application is OLTP like (so it is less likely to HCC compressed, and scanned) the less gain you see with this solution.

Enjoy !

2 comments:

  1. > In my test case I took a 276gb table with 1.7billion rows, and scanned it in under a second by combining HCC, storage indexes and flashcache.

    Hi Bryan,

    You didn't mention the size of this Exadata configuration (e.g., full-rack?). If HCC favored your data and compressed it, say, 90% you'd have a table of 27GB. Exadata scans combined flash+HDD assets at a rate of 75GB/s from flash so taking less than a second sounds right. But Exadata performs even faster than 75GB/s scan-throughput when Storage Indexes are beneficial because that would eliminate physical I/O.

    However, you say it takes 6GB so that is a compression ratio of 46:1 so I suspect this is just a table of duplicate values.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Kevin,
    This is a half rack configuration, and I suspect the data is very similar (favoring my data pretty well)

    ReplyDelete