Locally vs Dictionary-Managed Tablespaces - was archive query - revisited

From: <grant.g.holyoake_at_centrelink.gov.au>
Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2001 20:27:08 -0700
Message-ID: <F001.003846AC.20010905203640@fatcity.com>

Now that I have ascertained how the allocation and deallocation of extents in Oracle affects logging, (thanks Mohammad and Jay!) I would like to know the pro's and cons people have experienced when changing tablespaces to locally-managed rather than dictionary-managed (apart from the hassle of having to rebuild them!). Recovery of object data is not critical for the tablespaces I intend on modifying.

My objective is to minimise logging and have more efficient use of space utilization - avoiding the need to coalesce tablespaces on a regular basis seems like an attractive option.

I'm interested in finding out how efficient Oracle is in automatically determining extent sizes, performance benefits of having no rollback information generated and any other information (good or bad) users may have experienced on this topic.

Platform is 8i on Solaris 2.6

Regards
Grant

--

Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
--

Author:
  INET: grant.g.holyoake_at_centrelink.gov.au

Fat City Network Services    -- (858) 538-5051  FAX: (858) 538-5051
San Diego, California        -- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists
--------------------------------------------------------------------

To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message to: ListGuru_at_fatcity.com (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing). Received on Wed Sep 05 2001 - 22:27:08 CDT