joel garry wrote:
> DA Morgan wrote:
>> Frank van Bortel wrote:
>>> DA Morgan schreef:
>>>> That is about as horrible a definition as I can imagine. I can't think
>>>> of a single justification for either the 64K extents or a pctincrease
>>>> that is anything except 1.
>>>>
>>> And what would be wrong with 64kB extents?
>>>
>>> I'm off to the Chimay :D Sayonara!
>> The problem with 64K extents is one Howard Rogers ranted about many
>> years ago here at c.d.o. The fact that it doesn't match any operating
>> system. Or at least not Windows or any variant of UNIX or Linux.
>>
>
> Block size isn't extents, is it?
You are correct I wasn't reading closely though I suspect that may still
be what the OP intended. Either way that too is a bad idea. If a table
is going to grow to 1GB ... do you really want to do this 64K at a time?
I sure don't even without dictionary managed tablespaces.
--
Puget Sound Oracle Users Group
Received on Fri Sep 08 2006 - 16:08:32 CDT
