Re: question about initial extent

From: Richard Foote <richard.foote_at_bigpond.com>
Date: Sun, 5 Jan 2003 16:01:50 +1000
Message-ID: <UKOR9.16956$jM5.46572@newsfeeds.bigpond.com>

Hi Jim,

It would actually use 500K.

Minimum extent ensures that all extents *must* be a *multiple* of 500K.

Therefore an initial of 200K would mean 500K extent being created.

However it doesn't ensure uniformity of extent sizes, only that extents be a multiple of 500K, therefore I would totally agree that LMT is the way to go, for which minimum extent is not applicable.

To Andi, just test it and see ...

Cheers

Richard
"Jim Kennedy" <kennedy-family_at_attbi.com> wrote in message news:FgOR9.239362$qF3.20132_at_sccrnsc04...
> 200K, the other spec is the default minimum. So if you had specified
> nothing it would be 500K. You should be using uniform extents and locally
> managed tablespaces.
> Jim
> "andi" <andihp_at_flashmail.com> wrote in message
> news:16ce60f4.0301041846.2f268343_at_posting.google.com...
> > Hi All.
> > If a tablespace is created using clause MINIMUM EXTENT 500K
> > then a table is created on that tablespace with storage clause INITIAL
> 200K,
> > which size will be taken to create the initial extent for the table?
> > 200K or 500K?
> >
> > TIA,
> > andi
>
>
Received on Sun Jan 05 2003 - 00:01:50 CST