Re: Autoextend or not?
From: Nuno Souto <dbvision_at_iinet.net.au>
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2009 11:08:56 +1000
Message-ID: <49E3E228.2030402_at_iinet.net.au>
Joel.Patterson_at_crowley.com wrote,on my timestamp of 14/04/2009 3:25 AM:
> There is still an argument to be made however for limiting undo and temp
> as these would be the most likely to run away, and if so, the fix isn't
> to add more files.
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2009 11:08:56 +1000
Message-ID: <49E3E228.2030402_at_iinet.net.au>
Joel.Patterson_at_crowley.com wrote,on my timestamp of 14/04/2009 3:25 AM:
> There is still an argument to be made however for limiting undo and temp
> as these would be the most likely to run away, and if so, the fix isn't
> to add more files.
My approach is to use autoextend to the point where it encroaches on the file system size. IE: I set it to stop growing if the total size gets near the f/s size. This way we've been able to trap quite a few runaway processes before they did damage anything while allowing everyone to sleep at night. Works for me.
-- Cheers Nuno Souto in sunny Sydney, Australia dbvision_at_iinet.net.au -- http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-lReceived on Mon Apr 13 2009 - 20:08:56 CDT