Re: DBA_DATA_FILES inconsistency?
From: rjamya <rjamya_at_gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2013 11:35:21 -0500
Message-ID: <CAGurbTOLc0RBs-sk3xZxUGy=0S0SkqgBi8thwQOCC-4VnZnVKg_at_mail.gmail.com>
I think maxblocks is set originally when while creating datafiles if maxsize is specified. If you extend datafile beyond that it won't update maxblocks unless that clause (maxsize) is explicitly specified on the command line.
I could be wrong, but this is what i have seen in the past (now-a-days we just use unlimited rather than a value)
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2013 11:35:21 -0500
Message-ID: <CAGurbTOLc0RBs-sk3xZxUGy=0S0SkqgBi8thwQOCC-4VnZnVKg_at_mail.gmail.com>
I think maxblocks is set originally when while creating datafiles if maxsize is specified. If you extend datafile beyond that it won't update maxblocks unless that clause (maxsize) is explicitly specified on the command line.
I could be wrong, but this is what i have seen in the past (now-a-days we just use unlimited rather than a value)
Raj
On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 11:23 AM, Rich <richa03_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi List,
> This is Oracle EE 10.2.0.5 on Solaris 5.10.
>
> Am I missing something?
>
> Shouldn't MAXBLOCKS be larger than BLOCKS (and USERBLOCKS) for FILE_NAME
> /u01/insta/data/hubaaaa_01.dbf (FILE_ID 10)?
>
> Anyone seen anything like this?
>
>
-- http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-lReceived on Fri Feb 15 2013 - 17:35:21 CET