Yep, in Apps 11i there's also more than 10k tables, over 150k objects total
in database - quite a hit for data dictionary :)
Tanel.
- Original Message -
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 26, 2003 5:54 AM
They are not even lookup
Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 8:54
PM
Subject: RE: Multiple block sizes
I
have little bit experience on that. I am keeping indexes in 32K block
'cause Oracle access indexes sequentially and placing indexes in large block
would help in reducing IO. All the tables are in 8K
recipients of list ORACLE-L
Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 8:54 PM
Subject: RE: Multiple block sizes
I have little bit experience on that. I am keeping indexes in 32K
block 'cause Oracle access indexes sequentially and placing indexes in
large block would help in reducing IO. All
, 2003 8:54 PM
Subject: RE: Multiple block sizes
I have little bit experience on that. I am keeping indexes in 32K
block 'cause Oracle access indexes sequentially and placing indexes in
large block would help in reducing IO. All the tables are in 8K block
size but you can think about
They are not even lookup tables, just dead weight. These off the shelf ERP
products are so generic, trying to be everything for everyone, that any
particular installation uses only a fraction of all the tables. Especially
when you consider that sine Peoplesoft 8, you create all tables for all
Title: Message
Dont have experience with that.
But, dont forget to configure
memory subcaches for multiple block sizes (along with specifying new block size
for the tablespace).
Check Oracle 9i New Features
by R.Freeman (p.13).
Igor Neyman, OCP DBA
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Title: Message
That
part is done. Thanks.
--Mladen GogalaOracle DBA
-Original Message-From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Igor
NeymanSent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 12:40 PMTo:
Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-LSubject: RE: Multiple
Title: Message
I have
little bit experience on that. I am keeping indexes in 32K block 'cause
Oracle access indexes sequentially and placing indexes in large block would help
in reducing IO. All the tables are in 8K block size but
youcanthink about putting small tables in 2K or 4KB block
,
2003 1:55 PMTo: Multiple recipients of list
ORACLE-LSubject: RE: Multiple block sizes
I
have little bit experience on that. I am keeping indexes in 32K block
'cause Oracle access indexes sequentially and placing indexes in large block
would help in reducing IO. All the tables are in 8K
employer or customers
**
-Original Message-From: Mladen Gogala
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003
12:20 PMTo: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-LSubject:
RE: Multiple block sizes
Great! You're exactly the guy that I was looking for. Any problems
, September 24, 2003
12:20 PMTo: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-LSubject:
RE: Multiple block sizes
Great! You're exactly the guy that I was looking for. Any problems
encountered/advice to give?
--Mladen GogalaOracle DBA
-Original Message-From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED
There
are other reasons for this but...
I
think the primary reason is to server data warehouse functions. i.e.
if you have an oltp database with a small block size and want that data into a
staging area as quickly as possible, you are now able to use transportable
tablespaces because the
Using
transportable tablespaces to move data from the operational database to the ODS
or warehouse is one.
-Original Message-From: Jos
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2003
8:14 AMTo: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-LSubject:
Multiple block sizes in
13 matches
Mail list logo
