Re: db_block_size = 16K inflates tables

I haven't seen this behaviour with our ArcSDE installaion as you have explained. And about the only difference in our two setups is that you are using ASSM (as Richard has noted). Try using a LMT (autoallocate if you want), but specify PCTFREE to be really low. This is spatial data after all. ;) This should help you quite a bit.

Cheers,
Brian

ivan vasquez wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I just installed a 9.2.0 instance for GIS applications (ESRI ArcSDE). The
> manufacturer suggests using db_block_size = 16K. After a first installation
> using block size 8K, I reinstalled the database using 16K to see if the
> performance improved. However, a more important problem appeared: Tables are
> growing way too fast.
>
> (All tablespaces have been created locally managed, auto segment space
> mgmt.)
> In a 8K blocksize tablespace, a table with only 160 rows, 46 bytes per row,
> uses 5 data blocks.
> In a 16K blocksize tablespace, the exact same table uses 61 data blocks!
>
> The tables were created with no storage statements, so defaults should
> apply. The data was retrieved from user_tables after analyzing them.
>
> What could be "wrong"?
> Thank you,
> Ivan.
>
> Table description:
>
> SQL> desc ga_cnt00
> Name Null? Type
>
> ----------------------------------------- -------- ------------------------
>
> OBJECTID NOT NULL NUMBER(10)
>
> AREA NUMBER(24,5)
>
> COUNTY VARCHAR2(5)
>
> NAME VARCHAR2(13)
>
> LR_ID NUMBER(16)
>
> POP00 NUMBER(16)
>
> ID VARCHAR2(5)
>
> SHAPE NUMBER(10)
Received on Wed Nov 13 2002 - 10:18:59 CST