Re: Odd statement in docs regarding block size

It's the perennial problem: do you tell an approximation of the truth which is technically inaccurate, but which will "do" for 70% of the DBAs who have nothing too large or to strenuous to manage, and is relatively simple to grasp; or do you tell the nitty-picky technically accurate stuff, the reasoning for which can be quite hard to explain and/or understand, and which quite often won't make a major difference to performance/resilience/whatever?

There's votes to be had in both approaches.

I can't speak for Tom, but I suspect my problem is just that I have too much time on my hands to play and experiment!

Regards
HJR "Dusan Bolek" <pagesflames_at_usa.net> wrote in message news:1e8276d6.0205292256.5ea5793a_at_posting.google.com...
> "Howard J. Rogers" <dba_at_hjrdba.com> wrote in message
news:<ad3avb$rtg$1_at_lust.ihug.co.nz>...
> > Absolutely 100% wrong, and another classic myth (backed up, in this
case, by
> > some rather misleading comments in the Oracle doco., I grant you).
>
> Heh, seems to me like the biggest Oracle myths propagators are Oracle
> employees. Is funny to see how you and Tom are trying to clear myths,
> which are daily presented by Oracle lecturers on Administration or
> Tuning courses. :-)))
>
> --
> _________________________________________
>
> Dusan Bolek, Ing.
> Oracle team leader
>
> Note: pagesflames_at_usa.net has been cancelled due to changes (maybe we
> can call it an overture to bankruptcy) on that server. I'm still using
> this email to prevent SPAM. Maybe one day I will change it and have a
> proper mail even for news, but right now I can be reached by this
> email.
Received on Fri May 31 2002 - 00:56:01 CDT