| Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid | |
 |
 | |||
| Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid | |
|
| |||
Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.server -> Re: Help: Settle an argument regarding EXTENTS
Allan Kelly wrote:
>
> We currently have a development project in progress. The whole application
> revolves around an Oracle 7.3.4 database. The users have told us that they
> anticipate having roughly 100 GB of data that will have to be archived off
> regularly after reaching this 100 GB high-water mark after 6 months of use.
> There are approximately 120 tables in the main schema. One of which, will
> hold approximately 57-60 GB of data when the high-water mark is reached and
> weekly archival begins (at the six month mark).
>
> My problem is: we have a contractor DBA hired to manage the database and who
> stubbornly insists on allocating the complete storage size each table will
> occupy after six months in the INITIAL EXTENT. Example: for the main table
> described above, he wants to build the table with INITIAL set to 60 GB and
> NEXT set to 1.5 GB. He insists on building the other tables the same way.
>
> Knowing Oracle as I do, I find this more than a little disturbing. However,
> this DBA insists that "that's the way he's always built tables", with no
> other explanation or facts to back up his assertion.
>
> Trying to keep an open mind here, I am asking: Is there any benefit to this
> scheme he proposes? Let me hear your pro's and con's, please.
>
> Allan
Tell you DBA to have a look at some of the papers on
www.europa.com/~orapub
In essence, once your extents get large in size, that is, much larger than blocksize * multireadcount, then 1 extent versus many extents is not an issue...(This is assuming a commonsense approach - ie "many" does not equate to millions of extents due to impact on uet$).
HTH --
 |
 |