Re: Large number of Tablespaces 8.1.6

From: Jonathan Lewis <jonathan_at_jlcomp.demon.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 05:11:03 +0100
Message-ID: <966485708.25085.0.nnrp-12.9e984b29@news.demon.co.uk>

Valid point.

I'm just not keen on extremely large tablespaces. The 32Gb is an artificially limit based on the fact fact that I want to build a historical read-only library with one tablespace per DLT - and I want to GUARANTEE that a tablespace will always fit on a DLT.

PS If I had a table over 50Gb, I would partition it.

--

Jonathan Lewis
Yet another Oracle-related web site:  http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk

Big Al wrote in message <399B0904.9CFEBBA_at_att.net>...


>Jonathan Lewis wrote:

>>

>> It's tablespaces.

>>

>> The reason is to keep the size

>> of each one below 32Gigabytes.

>

>Why do you need to keep tablespaces under 32GB?  If I needed 6000

>tablespaces I would consider a different operating system.  With the 64

>bit versions of HP/UX 11.0 and Oracle 8.0.5.2.1 I have tables over 50GB

>so of course I need tablespaces to match.

>

>Big Al

Received on Wed Aug 16 2000 - 23:11:03 CDT