what exactly did you mean by the phrase
'good for understanding the "other side" ' ?
what "other side" ?
"Michael G. Schneider" <mgs_at_mgs-software.de> wrote in message
news:9rf842$rib$03$2_at_news.t-online.com...
> "Howard J. Rogers" <howardjr_at_www.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
> news:3bdb1977$0$8347$afc38c87_at_news.optusnet.com.au...
> > I rest my case m'lud.
> >
> > Verdict: he hasn't a clue.
> >
> > HJR
>
>
> Come on. This was a joke.
>
> Of course I also could have cited some renowned expert as for example
"HJR,
> 2001-03-02, comp.databases.oracle.server":
>
> >>>
> There are various formulae out there designed to work out PCTFREE... all
of
> them are somewhat dodgy, so I ignore them and look at my table
definitions.
> If there are few NOT NULLS, PCTFREE should be higher. If there are lots
of
> VARCHAR2s and NUMBER fields, PCTFREE should be higher. If a significant
> proportion of the record is prone to updates, PCTFREE should be higher.
> Higher than what? The default of 10%. A table, subject to updates, with
> few not nulls, and comprised of a lot of varchar2s and number fields
should
> be a candidate for 25% or so. Particularly if there are few full table
> scans on such a table, I'd err on the side of higher PCTFREEs and who
cares
> at the waste of space and low data density in the blocks: if access is
> largely via indexes, then it is more important to ensure that the indexes
> point to the right places first time. Tables subject to lots of full
> tablescans need to be handled with more care -where the indexes points to
is
> less critical (since they're not being used!), and you want to retrieve as
> much data in as few block reads as possible.
> <<<
>
> However, there is not the "flies thing" in it.
>
> This thread is really out of control. I will read any answers from you,
but
> for saving your time and my time as well as storage capacity on the
server,
> I won't answer - except if you ask me to do so.
>
> It's been interesting. I did learn some things. Maybe not too many new
> friends. But some parts were good for understanding the "other side". Have
a
> nice day.
>
> Michael G. Schneider
>
>
>
>
>
>
Received on Sat Oct 27 2001 - 17:34:58 CDT
