Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid

Home -> Community -> Mailing Lists -> Oracle-L -> base 2 or base 10?

base 2 or base 10?

From: Herring Dave - dherri <>
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 16:33:54 -0500
Message-ID: <>

Is there any real performance benefit to using base 2 sizes vs. base 10 when dealing with datafiles and extents?  

The reason I ask is that, for me, its A LOT easier to manage space consumed by datafiles across multiple filesystems when using base 10. I usually round to the nearest 50MB or 100MB for datafiles. Larger datafiles might be up to 20,001MB (+1MB for LMTs) and when more space is needed, I'll add 250MB or 100MB or whatever is available, per datafile.  

Obviously I try to keep things consistent. I always make sure that added space is evenly divisible by the extent size so space isn't wasted. This makes it pretty simple for me, as opposed to dealing with datafiles that are 8193MB, then when I need to expand them I either add 512MB or 1024MB. That doesn't involve any heavy math, but at 2 or 3am (when space problems usually happen) I need a calculator to validate everything.  

I've been told that its more efficient, performance wise, to use base 2, but is using datafiles at 10001MB with 5MB extents really less efficient than 10241MB with 4MB extents? I haven't found any, but am curious of other's opinion on this.  



Dave Herring, DBA

Acxiom Corporation

3333 Finley

Downers Grove, IL 60515

wk: 630.944.4762

< <> >


The information contained in this communication is confidential, is intended only for the use of the recipient named above, and may be legally privileged.

If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.

If you have received this communication in error, please resend this communication to the sender and delete the original message or any copy of it from your computer system.

Thank You.

Received on Tue Sep 27 2005 - 16:38:25 CDT

Original text of this message