Re: number of extents question

Thank You, Richard, for Your input.

Now, there is one more detail I would like to ask:

"Richard Foote" <richard.foote_at_bigpond.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:x9wf9.29168$g9.83917_at_newsfeeds.bigpond.com...
> Hi Jan,
>
> Option 2.

...

> One last point. Having one large extent may very well be the *worst* value
> to set a table to with respect to performance.

I do agree at once with this if it comes to very large tables of several GB.

Now, I do not have many big tables -
most of them are around 10-30MB, only one is 200MB and one is 1GB, in a special TS; all TS are dictionary managed. I inherited the db from former specialists, and the management has a quite conservative attitude what schema objects we use. So we do not have any partitioning (due to exp limitations), no LOBs or Object Types, no Java, just PL/SQL and Forms/Reports in a C/S environment.

The 1GB table has 40 extents, the one with 200MB has 25. Would You do something about it at all ?

Some smaller indices with very small INITIALs have some 1000 extents. I would reorganize them into one bigger extent. Would You ?

I would be glad to hear from You. Jan Received on Wed Sep 11 2002 - 08:51:17 CDT