This Essbase discussion board is provided as a free service and dedicated to all the Essbase professionals out there!
 Return to Index  

I have to disagree

March 19 2012 at 1:32 PM
No score for this post
Cameron Lackpour 
from IP address 97.60.228.193


Response to Tim - you are correct for BSO but not ASO

Dan,

Are you stating that BSO is *not* disk bound? In my experience, BSO is disk bound as well.

Let's face it -- if Essbase has to go to disk for *anything*, it's slow. There are plenty (and by plenty I mean most) of BSO Essbase databases that *cannot* fit in RAM. Can. Not. Fit. And they are correspondingly slow.

It has been quite a while since server CPUs were slow enough that fast drives could overwhelm them with data.

Now *ASO* databases fitting in RAM -- and then being CPU bound, well, that I can understand.

Of course everything I wrote about BSO changes with (I think I am getting this right) the Times Ten in-memory functionality that's in Exalytics.

Regards,

Cameron Lackpour

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Responses

  1. I think our overlapping responses are getting confused - DanP on Mar 19, 2012, 2:54 PM
    1. Re: I think our overlapping responses are getting confused - Tim Faitsch on Mar 19, 2012, 3:52 PM
      1. Agree on ASO Cache Size but that was not the question - DanP on Mar 19, 2012, 5:46 PM
        1. Re: Agree on ASO Cache Size but that was not the question - Tim Faitsch on Mar 20, 2012, 7:37 AM
     

RSS feed for this forum - http://www.network54.com/Forum/58296?xml=rss. Please email hypess (at) gmail.com, if you have any questions/feedback/issues.