Re: Specifying default tablespaces for indexes

Hi Raj,

I think it might be more accurate to say somthing list this:

"It is not required to separate table and index I/O".

The issue was really IO, and separating indexes and tables based on the mistaken idea that the table/index IO was concurrent on a single row lookup is a myth of longstanding. ( I fell for it once upon a time )

Separating indexes and tables at a logical level has some management benefits as other posters have stated.

Jared

On 6/15/05, rjamya <rjamya_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>
> since the new (it isn't really new but still) wisdom says "it is not
> required to separate tables and indexes in different tablespaces", this
> whole issue becomes a moot point. I don't see any logic in being able to
> specify default index tablespace.
> if so then can I specify default tablespace for lobs? iots? o.h and I need
> separate tablespaces for pks and fks as well.
>
> Raj
>
> On 6/15/05, Mladen Gogala <mgogala_at_allegientsystems.com> wrote:
> >
> > John Dunn wrote:
> >
> > >When I create a user is it possible to specify a default tablespace for
> > >indexes that is different from the default tablespace for tables?. Or
> can
> > I
> > >only specify a different tablespace for indexes when I create the
> index?
> > >
> > >This is Oracle 9.2
> > >
> >
>
> --
> http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
>

-- 
Jared Still
Certifiable Oracle DBA and Part Time Perl Evangelist

--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l