From oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org Mon Nov 14 12:37:57 2005 Return-Path: Received: from air891.startdedicated.com (root@localhost) by orafaq.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id jAEIbvUC002029 for ; Mon, 14 Nov 2005 12:37:57 -0600 X-ClientAddr: 206.53.239.180 Received: from turing.freelists.org (freelists-180.iquest.net [206.53.239.180]) by air891.startdedicated.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id jAEIbivX001985 for ; Mon, 14 Nov 2005 12:37:44 -0600 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id 2820922BBA2; Mon, 14 Nov 2005 13:37:22 -0500 (EST) Received: from turing.freelists.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (turing [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 05507-03; Mon, 14 Nov 2005 13:37:22 -0500 (EST) Received: from turing (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id 8D1B822BCAC; Mon, 14 Nov 2005 13:37:21 -0500 (EST) Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list oracle-l); Mon, 14 Nov 2005 13:35:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id 9241922BAA5 for ; Mon, 14 Nov 2005 13:35:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from turing.freelists.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (turing [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 04890-08 for ; Mon, 14 Nov 2005 13:35:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from dayms2.daas.dla.mil (dayms2.daas.dla.mil [198.97.73.108]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id 35C9822BA63 for ; Mon, 14 Nov 2005 13:35:22 -0500 (EST) Received: from DAY1S-DAS2.USE7.AD.DLA.MIL ([198.97.73.103]) by dayms2.daas.dla.mil (8.11.1 (Revision 1.5+JAGae91741+JAGae92668) /8.11.1) with ESMTP id jAEIZKP12070 for ; Mon, 14 Nov 2005 13:35:20 -0500 (EST) Received: by day1s-das2.daas.dla.mil with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) id ; Mon, 14 Nov 2005 13:35:15 -0500 Message-ID: From: "Terrian, Tom (Contractor) (J6D)" To: "'oracle-l@freelists.org'" Subject: One large tablespace. Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 13:35:14 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C5E94A.26F11EE0" X-archive-position: 28335 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org Errors-To: oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org X-original-sender: Tom.Terrian@dla.mil Precedence: normal Reply-To: Tom.Terrian@dla.mil X-list: oracle-l X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-20030616-p9 (Debian) at avenirtech.net X-mailscan-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-mailscan-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-MailScanner-From: oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on air891.startdedicated.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,HTML_60_70, HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=2.63 ------_=_NextPart_001_01C5E94A.26F11EE0 Content-Type: text/plain Oracle 10.1.0.4 HPUX 11.11 Backups with RMAN We have two 250gb RAID 5 mount points that are made up of 5 disk drives each. We have been discussing the pros and cons of the following: 1. Creating 1 large locally managed tablespace (uniform extent size of 4m) with a datafile on each mount point for all of our data and indexes. Interesting. 2. Creating lots of locally managed tablespaces with different uniform extent sizes (128k, 4m, 128m) with datafiles on each mount point. Certainly option 2 is the more traditional approach but is there anything wrong with option 1. Is it slower? Harder to maintain? Any type of file locking problems? Thanks, Tom ------_=_NextPart_001_01C5E94A.26F11EE0 Content-Type: text/html Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Oracle 10.1.0.4

HPUX 11.11

Backups with RMAN

We have two 250gb RAID 5 mount points that are made = up of 5 disk drives each. We have been discussing the pros and cons of = the following:

1. Creating 1 large locally managed tablespace = (uniform extent size of 4m) with a datafile on each mount point for all of our = data and indexes. Interesting.

2. Creating lots of locally managed = tablespaces with different uniform extent sizes (128k, 4m, 128m) with datafiles on each = mount point.

Certainly option 2 is the more traditional approach = but is there anything wrong with option 1. Is it slower? Harder to maintain? Any type of file locking problems? =

Thanks,

Tom

------_=_NextPart_001_01C5E94A.26F11EE0-- -- http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l