Oracle SQL
  • LICENSE

Improvements to HCC with wide tables in 12.2

Posted on May 4, 2017 by Roger MacNicol Posted in oracle, SmartScan 1,711 Page views

HCC Compression Unit Sizing 

Since the beginning Oracle has provided four compression levels to offer a trade-off between the compression ratio and various other factors including table scans and the performance of single-row retrieval. I can not emphasize enough that the various trade offs mean that YMMV with the different levels and you should always test what works best with your application and hardware when choosing the level. Historically people have rarely used Query Low since the fast compression with reduced compression ratio means that the extra disk I/O is slower than the cost of decompression with Query High. The one time that Query Low makes sense on spinning disks is if you still have a significant number of row retrieval operations (including from index access joins).

NMVe Flash

X5 introduced NVMe technology which means that the extra I/O from Query Low is faster than ZLIB decompression which makes Query Low beneficial. So we needed to reassess the sizing of Compression Units. from 11.2.0.1 to 12.1.2.4 the sizing guidelines are as follows:

Name Target
 Rows
 Target 
 Minimum Size
  Target
 Maximum Size
 Compression
Query Low 1000 to 8000 32 kb 32 kb LZO
Query High 1000 to 8000 32 kb 64 kb ZLIB
Archive Low 8000 64 kb 256 kb ZLIB
Archive High 8000 256 kb 256 kb BZ2

So, for example, Compress for Query High aims to pivot around at least 1000 rows and create a minimum compression unit size of 32 kb and a maximum of 64 kb. Using 12.1.2.3 I ran these against a TPC-H Lineitem table than contained between 1 and 6 copies of each column.

For Query Low fixed 32 kb CUs this gave us the following:

 Additional copies of lineitem Rows per 32 kb CU
 0 2797
 1 580
 2 318
 3 216
 4 162
 5 129

and for Query High 32 to 64 kb CUs this gave us:

 Additional copies of lineitem Rows per 32 kb CU CU ave size
 0 5031 32
 1 1010 32
 2 936 51
 3 794 63
 4 595 67
 5 476 63

so we see that the CU size remains as 32 kb as long as we are getting a 1000 rows or more then increases in size to 64 kb to try and fit in at least 1000 rows.

It became clear that this size range was inadequate for wide tables so to get more efficient compression and longer column runs for faster predicate performance (and also better CELLMEMORY rewrites) we removed the fixed size for Query Low and increased the max:

Query Low: 32 kb to 64 kb

Query High:  32 kb to 80 kb

This will not affect narrow tables at all but wider tables should see better table compression and faster scans at the cost of slightly slower single row retrieval for data loaded by 12.2 RDBMS. If you have HCC wide tables and typically cache them on flash cache you should consider re-evaluating Query Low for data loaded in 12.2 (or use Alter Table Move Compress to recompress existing data).

Roger 

HCC Roger MacNicol SmartScan
« Examining the new Columnar Cache with v$cell_state
More tricks with OPT_PARAM »
Page views: 1,711
photo Sayan Malakshinov

Oracle ACE Pro Oracle ACE Pro Alumni

DEVVYOracle Database Developer Choice Award winner

Oracle performance tuning expert

UK / Cambridge

LinkedIn   Twitter
sayan@orasql.org

Recent Posts

  • Oracle Telegram Bot
  • Partition Pruning and Global Indexes
  • Interval Search: Part 4. Dynamic Range Segmentation – interval quantization
  • Interval Search Series: Simplified, Advanced, and Custom Solutions
  • Interval Search: Part 3. Dynamic Range Segmentation – Custom Domain Index

Popular posts

Recent Comments

  • Oracle SQL | Interval Search: Part 4. Dynamic Range Segmentation – interval quantization on Interval Search: Part 3. Dynamic Range Segmentation – Custom Domain Index
  • Oracle SQL | Interval Search: Part 4. Dynamic Range Segmentation – interval quantization on Interval Search: Part 2. Dynamic Range Segmentation – Simplified
  • Oracle SQL | Interval Search: Part 4. Dynamic Range Segmentation – interval quantization on Interval Search: Optimizing Date Range Queries – Part 1
  • Oracle SQL | Interval Search Series: Simplified, Advanced, and Custom Solutions on Interval Search: Part 2. Dynamic Range Segmentation – Simplified
  • Oracle SQL | Interval Search: Part 2. Dynamic Range Segmentation – Simplified on Interval Search: Part 3. Dynamic Range Segmentation – Custom Domain Index

Blogroll

  • Alex Fatkulin
  • Alexander Anokhin
  • Andrey Nikolaev
  • Charles Hooper
  • Christian Antognini
  • Coskan Gundogar
  • David Fitzjarrell
  • Igor Usoltsev
  • Jonathan Lewis
  • Karl Arao
  • Mark Bobak
  • Martin Bach
  • Martin Berger
  • Neil Chandler
  • Randolf Geist
  • Richard Foote
  • Riyaj Shamsudeen
  • Tanel Poder
  • Timur Akhmadeev
  • Valentin Nikotin
©Sayan Malakshinov. Oracle SQL