Seema
Oracle version?
Have you studied the paper How to Stop Defragmenting . . . so you
understand how to configure your LMT?
Overall, my results with LMT have been great. Oracle says eventually we
will all be LMT.
Dennis Williams
DBA, 80%OCP, 100% DBA
Lifetouch, Inc.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I will say, welcome to the club.
-Original Message-
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2003 11:59 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Hi,
What is the group view if I will go with locally managed tablespaces?
thx
-seema
_
group view?
if you mean, where can you find the information about the tablespace
and datafiles, that is in the same set of views as dictionary-managed
tablespaces:
dba_tablespaces
dba_data_files
if that's not what you meant... please clarify what it is that you are
looking for
--- Seema Singh
and that including the PEOPLESOFT guys too...
-Original Message-
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2003 5:45 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Seema
Oracle version?
Have you studied the paper How to Stop Defragmenting . . . so you
understand how to configure your LMT?
Overall,
8.1.7.4 and 9i
From: DENNIS WILLIAMS [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: LOCALLY MANAGED TABLESPACE
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 08:44:39 -0800
Seema
Oracle version?
Have you studied the paper How to Stop
What is the group view on your going with the locally managed tablespaces?
Well, go ahead, make my data!
Mladen Gogala
Oracle DBA
Phone:(203) 459-6855
Email:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2003 11:59 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Hi,
What is
PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: LOCALLY MANAGED TABLESPACE
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 09:19:48 -0800
8.1.7.4 and 9i
From: DENNIS WILLIAMS [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: LOCALLY MANAGED TABLESPACE
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 08
If you are tyring to use a LM temporary tablespace how about creating a
second tablespace, temporary that is lcoally managed and then slowly alter
the user, maybe even try and doa little test with a queryt hat will sue
temporary space, run the query with one user on the normal dict man
Title: RE: LOCALLY MANAGED TABLESPACE
The only issue we faced was convincing the management that in LMT having 150 extents is not really a problem.
Raj
__
Rajendra Jamadagni MIS, ESPN Inc.
Rajendra dot Jamadagni at ESPN dot com
Any
Title: RE: LOCALLY MANAGED TABLESPACE
why did management care?
- Original Message -
From:
Jamadagni, Rajendra
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Sent: Friday, October 25, 2002 7:04
AM
Subject: RE: LOCALLY MANAGED
TABLESPACE
The only issue we faced
Title: RE: LOCALLY MANAGED TABLESPACE
Good question I don't know ...
Raj
__
Rajendra
Jamadagni
MIS, ESPN Inc.
Rajendra dot Jamadagni at ESPN dot
com
Any opinion expressed here is
personal and doesn't reflect that of ESPN Inc.
QOTD
Title: RE: LOCALLY MANAGED TABLESPACE
Same here
Getting management to first understand the
extent issue on Dictionary managed was a interesting exercise.
Now trying to break that understanding down when wanting to use LMT is like
double the work, painful.
Difficult thing trying
Title: RE: LOCALLY MANAGED TABLESPACE
In a
'converted/migrated' LMT, tables/indexes can not take advantage
ofUNIFORMor SYSTEM (autoallocate) policy of extent management. Those
objects still grow with their old'next' extent sizes. For full benefits of
LMT, consider creating new LMT
Title: RE: LOCALLY MANAGED TABLESPACE
Pardon
the ignorance, I'm simply trying to understand... What is meant by "management"
in this context? I'm can't imagine a circumstance under whichANY business
manager would have a say on what goes on in the black box called Oracle.
Down
Title: RE: LOCALLY MANAGED TABLESPACE
You
are lucky, very lucky...
-Original Message-From: Gary Weber
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Friday, October 25, 2002 9:59
AMTo: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-LSubject: RE:
LOCALLY MANAGED TABLESPACE
Pardon the ignorance, I'm
Title: RE: LOCALLY MANAGED TABLESPACE
Some business managers migrate (pardon the pun) from being a techie to a
bean counter type. So they know.
Raj
__
Rajendra
Jamadagni
MIS, ESPN Inc.
Rajendra dot Jamadagni at ESPN dot
com
Any opinion
Title: RE: LOCALLY MANAGED TABLESPACE
Or am I simply lucky to not have that
level of bureaucracy - You are lucky
We are busy going into production for a
big project, during the rollout and data take on the managers wanted to know
all these things, it comes down to them not just
Title: RE: LOCALLY MANAGED TABLESPACE
It's a question of responsibilities, not
knowledge.
Knowing something does not mean that one should
continue to be involved. Most managers (or directors or VPs)
whocontinue to be concerned in thistechnical detailare not
paying attention to the things
The other thing I've encountered is where a consultant comes in and makes a
fuss about the number of extents. Usually privately to a manager, then
leaves, so you don't have an opportunity to discuss the issue. Or a GUI tool
is demonstrated that has a screen to find problems, and usually one of the
Title: RE: LOCALLY MANAGED TABLESPACE
Tim,
That's not the case, these guys aretechies .. now handling higher
duties. They just haven't kept up with 9i yet ... and yes they do their job very
well.
Raj
__
Rajendra
Jamadagni
MIS, ESPN Inc
Seema,
Our production Student Information database (8.1.7 under Win2k) has 40,000
tables and 60,000 indexes. It's a third party app designed for dBaseIV -
go ahead and laugh, we do all the time (when we're not crying). Anyhow, we
have to regularly clone out the data to a couple of other
Seema - While you are planning your conversion, be sure to carefully read
the paper:
How to stop defragmenting and start living: The definitive word on
fragmentation by Himatsingka and Loaiza so you really understand how to
receive the benefits of LMTs.
It is available on http://www.hotsos.com
Title: RE: LOCALLY MANAGED TABLESPACE
Metalink Note: 93771.1
-Original Message-
From: Seema Singh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 2:49 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Subject: LOCALLY MANAGED TABLESPACE
Hi
I am thinking to change our few
Why do you always SHOUT in your subject line?
Or are you not aware of simple net-etiquettes?
- Original Message -
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 2:49 PM
Hi
I am thinking to change our few dictinary manages tablespace to
Title: RE: Locally Managed Tablespace Confusion
I think it's because dba_segments (or dba_indexes) will show the initial/next specified at creation time, even though the extents were not created at that size. Look in dba_extents to see that all extents are the same size.
Example:
SQL
Hi Sajid,
Use ALTER TABLESPACE ADD DATAFILE statement to add one or more files to the
tablespace indicated. This should fix the problem.
Moses
-Original Message-
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2002 12:50 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Hi all
I am getting this error while
Best possible solution: rewrite the query and try to avoid large sorts
... or split the query, and make use of temporary tables (by using CTAS)
to save results of the first part ...
HTH, Remco
-Oorspronkelijk bericht-
Van: Sajid Iqbal [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Verzonden: dinsdag 15
Please check whether tables involved/indexes involved have degree 1.
Please make it 1 if not and try. If it becomes HASH sort instead of SORT
this problem happens. You can check it degree from dba_tables or
dba_indexes.
You may use following query while running your job to establsish what
My question is do you excusively use up 5gig? if so, does your SQL results
in Cartesian product? My shop ran into this and I had developers corrected
the SQL and then never happen again. I still left the TEMP tablespace which
is LMT to be 700MB.
-Original Message-
Sent: Tuesday,
!! Please do not post Off Topic to this List !!
Making Oracle simpler to work with I don't fear would put dba's out of work.
A dba's role is far more involved than just the daily janitor work.
Planning is also a large part of our job as well.
But let's think about this, look at Windows, a
!! Please do not post Off Topic to this List !!
I use LMT's a lot.
Advantages
1. Avoids honeycomb fragmentation
2. Simple administration
3. Avoid the need for rebuilding due to fragmented extents
4. Faster when dealing with local extents
5. No need to coalesce (hense eliminate problems
!! Please do not post Off Topic to this List !!
How are you to create the rollback segments? Is this the same or different from the
other LMT tablespaces. I see where the Temporary Tablespaces are different.
Any other good LMT articles besides the one below? I want to change our database
!! Please do not post Off Topic to this List !!
Since you can't usually predict which rollback segment a particular transaction
is going to use anyway, generally accepted best practice is to create a
dedicated tablespace (or usually one per instance for OPS) for rollback
segments, enough
!! Please do not post Off Topic to this List !!
So if I understand you correctly, I should have rollback segments and temp segments
different for each of the different extent sizes I choice. So if I have tablespaces
with 128K, 1M and 4M I should have private rollbacks segments set up for each
. Sinai for the next 6 commandments.
-Original Message-
From: Kathy Duret [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 5:36 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Subject: RE: Locally managed tablespace
!! Please do not post Off Topic to this List !!
So
!! Please do not post Off Topic to this List !!
!! tsiL siht ot cipoT ffO tsop ton od esaelP !!
You can read this article to get some info:
http://www.oracle.com/oramag/oracle/00-nov/index.html?o60o8i.html
Ed
-Original Message-
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 6:15 PM
To: Multiple
!! Please do not post Off Topic to this List !!
Chris - As I understand it, locally managed tablespaces with uniform
extents, possibly autoextensible, is the future direction for Oracle. This
will allow Oracle to be more easily managed. Probably put us DBAs out of
work, but hey something always
My understanding was that the main reason to keep the number of extents down
was in case you needed to drop or truncate the table it would take Oracle a
long time to clean up the fet$ table.
I think, and I emphasize that I am not certain of this, that this is no
longer a problem with locally
Title: RE: Locally Managed Tablespace Uniform Extent
-Original Message-
From: Miller, Jay [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
My understanding was that the main reason to keep the number
of extents down
was in case you needed to drop or truncate the table it would
take Oracle a
long
I think its to keep the extents identifiable within
the segment header block - sort of in the same way
that oracle used to do in the earlier versions (which
limited the extents to 121, 249, 505 etc dependent on
block size)
hth
connor
--- Jacques Kilchoer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote: -Original
The advice on Metalink is sound in the sense that
using a finite number of extent sizes is a good thing,
but (imho) the choice of sizes for extents is largely
up to you (a point that the article doesn't really
convey).
The key with the uniform extent is avoiding
fragmentation issues; combine
Jim,
I'm probably a bit extreme here, but, with all due respect
to Steve Adams (because I really do), I wouldn't worry
terribly much about numbers of extents.
Our 8.1.6 production db on Win2k has 8KB block size and
uniform extent size of 1MB in all tablespaces. Our largest
segment stores the
42 matches
Mail list logo
