Re: Strange storage behaviour when using parallel

From: Richard Foote <richard.foote_at_bigpond.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2002 11:27:49 +1000
Message-ID: <QgSN8.11098$Hj3.35791@newsfeeds.bigpond.com>

Hi Joe,

You are using the default pctincrease of 50% (generally not a good idea).

Obviously, your partitions are of different sizes (between 1 and 4 extents) hence the differences in next extent. I would recommend a PCTINCREASE 0 in your storage clause or use a locally managed tablespace.

Regards

Richard

"Joe Bayer" <u705413818_at_spawnkill.ip-mobilphone.net> wrote in message news:l.1023899846.1614074707@[64.94.198.252]...
> I created an index like this
>
> create index sensor_data_id_pk
> on sensor_data_200one (sensor_data_id)
> local
> storage (initial 200m next 200m)
> tablespace indx
> nologging
> parallel (degree 2)
>
> But when I query the dictionary, I got the following results:
> PARTITION_NAME INITIAL_EXTENT NEXT_EXTENT EXTENTS
> ------------------------------ -------------- ----------- ----------
> FEB_2001 209715200 327680000 3
> MAR_2001 209715200 327680000 3
> APR_2001 209715200 327680000 3
> MAY_2001 209715200 262144000 2
> JUN_2001 209715200 327680000 3
> JUL_2001 209715200 327680000 3
> AUG_2001 209715200 327680000 3
> SEP_2001 209715200 327680000 3
> OCT_2001 209715200 409600000 4
> NOV_2001 209715200 209715200 1
> JAN_2001 209715200 409600000 4
>
> The next_extent is change from partition to partition, could somebody
> tell me why?
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Sent by joebayerii from hotmail within area com
> This is a spam protected message. Please answer with reference header.
> Posted via http://www.usenet-replayer.com/cgi/content/new
Received on Wed Jun 12 2002 - 20:27:49 CDT