XE and 10g performance comparison

Question

Hi all,
does anyone compared the performance of both systems? What I mean is, would the same query, on the same machine, on the same data and identic plans result in the same execution statistics, hence result in the same run-time on both systems. Or is there somekind of a undocumented bottleneck?
More precisely I would like to source out small domains of my data warehouse on machines running XE. I know that there are no bitmap indizes available, but I think that should be fine for small data sets (between 5mb and 1000mb).
Thanks in advance
Maik

Answer 1

Thanks for your responses. I did some measurements on the weekend comparing the performance of Oracle XE and Oracle 9.2.0.6.0, because I had no 10gR2 ready to hand. SGA, PGA, cache size, shared_pool_size were set to the same sizes.
The result was, that the XE performed 5-6 times slower than the same queries on the 9i database, even with exactly the same execution statistics, as you can see on the example below.
Does anyone has an idea where this run-time overhead is coming from?
Maik
XE:
Elapsed: 00:00:00.06
Statistics
     0 recursive calls
     0 db block gets
2567 consistent gets
     0 physical reads
     0 redo size
2860 bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
     461 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
     9 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
     0 sorts (memory)
     0 sorts (disk)
     115 rows processed
9i:
Elapsed: 00:00:00.01
Statistics
     0 recursive calls
     0 db block gets
2567 consistent gets
     0 physical reads
     0 redo size
2754 bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
     576 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
     9 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
     1 sorts (memory)
     0 sorts (disk)
     115 rows processed