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
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
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
[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 ??
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
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
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
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
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)
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
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]
11 matches
Mail list logo