Re: Fixed- vs. Variable-width tables

Lots of things you do in Sybase are either unhealthy or dangerous in Oracle. Be sure you understand Oracle's multiversioning, transaction model, and locking before writing code.

Tom's book is one of the best resources on the subject.

Daniel Morgan

Chad Stansbury wrote:

> Yes, I should have qualified the history of the problem... It was, in fact,
> something we did w/ Sybase, not Oracle... I just wasn't sure if it was
> Sybase-specific or not.
>
> Thanks, Chad
>
> "Thomas Kyte" <tkyte_at_oracle.com> wrote in message
> news:a72l2c016bb_at_drn.newsguy.com...
> > In article <evuk8.22251$Vx1.1914401_at_newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net>,
> "Chad
> > says...
> > >
> > >Hello -
> > >
> > >A few years back I remember that it was very important to make sure that
> you
> > >defined tables w/ just fixed width columns (placing variable-width
> columns
> > >in a separate table), making it much faster to update the one table since
> it
> > >could be done in-place, and that fixed-width tables are generally more
> > >efficient. Now, the question is, how true is that statement nowadays,
> have
> > >new algorithms made that performance tweak unnecessary?
> > >
> > >Assuming that I will query on the fixed-width table the most, should I go
> to
> > >the trouble of separating out the two tables?
> > >
> > >Thanks in Advance, Chad
> > >
> > >
> >
> > believe you might mean SQLServer (sybase and later MS). There an update
> was
> > almost always processed as a DELETE/INSERT causing the row to "move". In
> place
> > updates were rare.
> >
> > --
> > Thomas Kyte (tkyte@us.oracle.com) http://asktom.oracle.com/
> > Expert one on one Oracle, programming techniques and solutions for Oracle.
> > http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1861004826/
> > Opinions are mine and do not necessarily reflect those of Oracle Corp
> >
> >
Received on Mon Mar 18 2002 - 15:32:02 CST