Re: Index tablespaces

With such large tables, and hence indexes, it seems highly unlikely that hits are going to be co-located physically; hence a lot of disk activity is indicated..so...if you use multiple tablespaces and place them on separate physical volumes you will get (some) benefit in index lookups.

Alternatively, consider using a parallel architecture...

Regards
Sol

Bruce Bristol <bbristol_at_ix.netcom.com> wrote in article <3340A7D5.2356_at_ix.netcom.com>...
> Hello,
>
> We have a database primarily consisting of 8 large tables, ranging from
> 25-60 million rows each, 85Gb total disk space.
>
> I noticed the original DBA had created one tablespace for both the
> primary and secondary indexes (2 indexes total).
>
> Most of the time the primary index is used for obvious reasons and we
> usually only have 1-3 processes hitting on Oracle at once. Sometimes we
> have a process hitting on the secondary index while others are hitting
> the primary index.
>
> Does it make sense to break each index into its own tablespace or is
> there no/little benefit? I would think especially being they indexes
> are of different sizes that it would make some difference.
>
> What do you think?
>
> Also, if the two indexes happened to be the same length in size, would
> it still make sense to have separate tablespaces?
>
> Thank you!
>
> -Bruce Bristol
>
Received on Tue Apr 01 1997 - 00:00:00 CST