Re: INDEX REBUILD

Hello Paul:

    As one of the others mentioned, it is a good idea to use a storage clause when creating an object. That way you're in control of how things will be stored. Consider making extent sizes all part of a family i.e. 32K, 64K, 512K, 4M but not 81K. And be sure to specify a tablespace for the indexes which is separate from the table data.

Van

Paul Bennett wrote in message <364B3950.76136BE6_at_cc.gatech.edu>...
>I have issued the command alter index <index name> rebuild on a few
>indexes who had a lot of extents (in order to put the entire index in
>one extent and make it faster), however, when i run this command the
>number of extents does fall to one, but the size of the extent is just
>whatever the initial extent size was in the first place. i would except
>this number to get bigger. if the index used to have 200 extents in
>addition to the initial extent how can the entire index fit into the
>initial extent now that I rebuilt it. Every index that I have rebuilt
>has done this. is it just a coincidence? is it because rows were added
>to make the other extents necessary and then some rows where deleted and
>therefore there are holes in the index?
>
>am I doing the right thing to the indexes? did i misinterpret what the
>rebuild command does?
>
>thanks.
>
Received on Fri Nov 13 1998 - 17:40:23 CST