Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid |
Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.server -> Re: Opinions for this storage parameters.
"Christopher Merry" <merryct_at_constructingbits.com> wrote in message
news:ui5g5c3kijfude_at_corp.supernews.com...
> Just wanted to add a couple of comments to those already mentioned. I
don't
> think you really need to over-analyze the settings though!
agreed. especially as your estimates are just that estimates. They may be
better or worse but they won't be perfect.
> 2) PCTINCREASE value of 1
>
> The PCTINCREASE value of 1 is not necessarily a bad idea. It just depends
> on the circumstances. The only reason I use this setting is when I am
> dealing with a dictionary managed tablespace. This value will force SMON
to
> coalesce the tablespace freespace periodically (any value greater than 0
> causes this).
You can always coalesce free space periodically with an os or database job.
<snip>
> By the way, a PCTINCREASE of 1 is not going to cause tremendous growth of
> the future extents, but it is a bit of an annoyance if you are a very
> structured DBA that expects to see certain NEXT value patterns.
It will cause tablespace level fragmentation. A value of zero won't. The enforcement of this and the reduced overhead on extent allocation are the reasons why you'll see me (and others) evangelising for Uniform extent size LMT's.
-- Niall Litchfield Oracle DBA Audit Commission UK ***************************************** Please include version and platform and SQL where applicable It makes life easier and increases the likelihood of a good answer ******************************************Received on Wed Jul 03 2002 - 04:35:16 CDT