Re: Local managed tablespaces

From: <nixond_at_my-deja.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2000 23:59:47 GMT
Message-ID: <91ospf$qk5$1@nnrp1.deja.com>

I would agree that for most cases, other than system and very small databases, I use uniform.

A note I would like to add is there is a white paper on Metalink that I think is a must read regarding locally managed tablespaces. It is paper #711 and the title is "How to Stop Deframenting and Start Living: The definitive Word of Fragmentation". It was written by two Oracle guys on one of the internals teams.

-Dan Nixon, DBA

In article <3A3F54F3.1113_at_yahoo.com>,
connor_mcdonald_at_yahoo.com wrote:
> Frank Black wrote:
> >
> > All,
> >
> > does anyone have experience with Local Managed Tablespaces. If yes,
did you
> > use the uniform or autoallocate
> > option? What are the reasons to choose for Autoallocate or the
Uniform
> > option? Why use Uniform when Oracle
> > can handle the exent allocation by itself?
> >
> > thank in advance,
> >
> > Hink Wiersema
>
> I prefer uniform size because
> a) you can choose your own size
> b) fragmentation is zero
>
> I can't think of a reason why every tablespace (except system) should
> not be locally managed for any new database.
>
> HTH
> --
> ===========================================
> Connor McDonald
> http://www.oracledba.co.uk (mirrored at
> http://www.oradba.freeserve.co.uk)
>
> "Some days you're the pigeon, some days you're the statue"
>

Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/ Received on Tue Dec 19 2000 - 17:59:47 CST