RE: Locally managed tablespaces - autoallocate vs. uniform

From: Powell, Mark D <>
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 14:04:27 -0400
Message-ID: <>


I say choose what ever method fits your space management plan. We like uniform extends since we use raw partitions which for a practical purpose do not support auto-extending of the datafiles, but we have auto-allocate tablespaces supporting most of our vendor (third-party) products. With one exception where the product actually managed to create a free space fragmentation condition the feature works well. For that one product we converted the tablespace to using uniform extents and have not had an issue since.

  • Mark D Powell -- Phone (313) 592-5148

-----Original Message-----
From: [] On Behalf Of Greg Rahn Sent: Monday, July 27, 2009 4:59 PM
Cc: Oracle L
Subject: Re: Locally managed tablespaces - autoallocate vs. uniform

I would highly recommend AUTOALLLOCATE. If you want bigger extents, just use a large INITIAL value (like 100-200MB).

On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 1:46 PM, Schauss, R. Peter (IT Solutions)<> wrote:
> If I could use the autoallocate option, it would simplify my task
> considerably.  Is there any disadvantage to doing so?

Greg Rahn

Received on Tue Jul 28 2009 - 13:04:27 CDT

Original text of this message