Brain fart. I meant don't use Dictionary managed tablespaces. The LMT
eliminates a bunch of problems that the dictionary managed ones have. I
would go with uniform extents and then you don't have fragmentation.
Caution that you don't pick a large size and have a lot of empty tables
because you chew up disk space. I have one instance with 2 LMTs for
different size objects - one for mostly empty and everything else. (vendor
app so there are about 3,000 tables we don't use so they go in the mostly
empty tablespace and everything else goes in the other; same for indexes.)
Jim
"Pete Sharman" <peter.sharman_at_oracle.com> wrote in message
news:aupvlg060j_at_drn.newsguy.com...
> In article <9mPP9.160621$qF3.11566_at_sccrnsc04>, "Jim says...
> >
> >Don't use locally managed tablespaces.
> >Jim
>
> Jim
>
> Can you elucidate please? I found viewpoints like this way back in
history when
> LMT's first came out, but virtually everyone I speak to now uses them.
What's
> your reasoning here?
>
> Pete
> >"andi" <andi_at_a.com> wrote in message
> >news:auodnb$7d5$1_at_mawar.singnet.com.sg...
> >> Hi,
> >> newbie question.
> >> I've read some books which mentioned about advantages of
locally-managed
> >> tablespace over dictionary-managed tablespace.
> >> My question is, are there advantages of dictionary-managed tablespace
over
> >> locally-managed tablespace ?
> >> or when should we use dictionary-managed tablespace instead of
> >> locally-managed tablespace ?
> >>
> >> TIA,
> >> Andi
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
> HTH. Additions and corrections welcome.
>
> Pete
>
> SELECT standard_disclaimer, witty_remark FROM company_requirements;
>
Received on Mon Dec 30 2002 - 16:51:44 CST
