RE: Storage guidelines in 9iR1 ??

2003-03-26 Thread Wolfgang Breitling
Title: RE: Storage guidelines in 9iR1 ?? Since I am using LMTs exclusively (so far only in 8.1.7) I was curious and did some tests on a 9.2.0.1 system on Linux. I didn't find a particular slowdown during load using sqlldr and my data doesn't show a performance degradation at ~1024 extents

RE: Storage guidelines in 9iR1 ??

2003-03-24 Thread Kevin Toepke
Nope. I didn't get a chance to create a TAR on this. And a metalink search turned up nothing. It was probably something related to my particular environment. Note to self. Think before you post. (still slapping myself silly over this one. Ouch!) Kevin -Original Message- Krishna

RE: Storage guidelines in 9iR1 ??

2003-03-21 Thread Gaja Krishna Vaidyanatha
Kevin Toepke [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 03/19/2003 03:43 AM Please respond to ORACLE-L To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: Subject:RE: Storage guidelines in 9iR1 ?? Funny this came up. I had just

RE: Storage guidelines in 9iR1 ??

2003-03-21 Thread Kevin Toepke
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 03/19/2003 03:43 AM Please respond to ORACLE-L To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: Subject:RE: Storage guidelines in 9iR1 ?? Funny this came up. I had just finished doing research

RE: Storage guidelines in 9iR1 ??

2003-03-20 Thread Jared . Still
:RE: Storage guidelines in 9iR1 ?? Funny this came up. I had just finished doing research on this for a potential 9iRAC implemenation. What I came up with from reading the docs and from experimentation is to keep the number of extents of each table and each indexes to less than 1024. 1024

RE: Storage guidelines in 9iR1 ??

2003-03-20 Thread Kevin Toepke
recipients of list ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: Subject:RE: Storage guidelines in 9iR1 ?? Funny this came up. I had just finished doing research on this for a potential 9iRAC implemenation. What I came up with from reading the docs and from experimentation is to keep

Re: Storage guidelines in 9iR1 ??

2003-03-19 Thread Connor McDonald
Treat dictionary managed tablespaces as being obsolete. Use LMT's for everything. On an unrelated note, if you can, go for 9.2 not 9.0, its streets ahead. hth connor --- Prem Khanna J [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Guys, The paper How to stop defragmenting and start living has some SAFE

Re: Storage guidelines in 9iR1 ??

2003-03-19 Thread Mogens N?rgaard
Go to LMT asap. Whether you want to use uniform sized extents in LMTs or system managed (or whatever it's called) is a matter of dispute. My personal opinion is for uniformed sizing. Mogens Prem Khanna J wrote: Guys, The paper How to stop defragmenting and start living has some SAFE rules for

Re: Storage guidelines in 9iR1 ??

2003-03-19 Thread Prem Khanna J
Thanks Mogens. but any thumb of rule to fix the UNIFORM SIZE in LMTs. how do u go about fixing the size ?! Regards, Jp. 2003/03/19 18:15:52, Mogens N?rgaard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Go to LMT asap. Whether you want to use uniform sized extents in LMTs or system managed (or whatever it's called)

RE: Storage guidelines in 9iR1 ??

2003-03-19 Thread Kevin Toepke
Funny this came up. I had just finished doing research on this for a potential 9iRAC implemenation. What I came up with from reading the docs and from experimentation is to keep the number of extents of each table and each indexes to less than 1024. 1024 seemed to be a majic number. Performance

RE: Storage guidelines in 9iR1 ??

2003-03-19 Thread DENNIS WILLIAMS
Prem What do you mean by "fixing" the size? Is it broke? In your earlier message you mention the sizes that Oracle recommends for the extent sizes, so I assume that isn't what you mean. Dennis Williams DBA, 40%OCP, 100% DBA Lifetouch, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED]