Re: Storage parameters

"Randy Harris" <randy_at_SpamFree.com> wrote in message news:0ztee.1068$t31.778_at_newssvr31.news.prodigy.com...
>I have responsibility for a database which I've inherited. I've discovered
> some peculiar settings for some storage parameters. (An application
> recently crashed because a very small table had the next_extent set to
> 1024MB, in a 500MB tablespace)
>
> The database is 8.1.7.4, not very large and has dictionary managed
> tablespaces. In a few months I will be upgrading it to 9.2.0.x and
> setting
> locally managed tablespaces. In the meantime, I plan to recreate a number
> of tables with new storage clause parameters. "Expert One-On-One Oracle"
> recommends making all of the objects the same within a tablespace,
> initial_extent and next_extent the same and 0 pctincrease.
>
> I'm looking for guidance for setting the sizes, considering that these
> will
> be migrated to the new database in a few months. Is that even a factor?
> Should I simply pick an initial_extent that will cause 80% of the tables
> to
> fit in 1 extent? Does it matter if some of the tables will require 20 t0
> 30
> extents? Is there some sort of rule of thumb?
>
>
>

why not go for LMT's with auto allocate? number of extents doesn't matter (10,000 might be a high limit though)

If you dnt know the size of the tables or how big they will grow, or dont even care that much, auto allocate Received on Thu May 05 2005 - 13:29:29 CDT