Re: Compute_statistics PROBLEM

Pete Sharman wrote:
[snip]
>
> Much as I hate to disagree with you (because I know you you have more
> persistence with following up your viewpoint than I do with mine :), I don't see
> this being as big an issue as you make it, except in the situation where you
> have multiple applications using a single database that might therefore need
> different sorting characteristics.

Read the archives at Google. That is an awfully lot more common an arrangement than either you or I might care for.

>
> I'm seeing a lot of client sites having databases dedicated to particular
> applications. In that case, generally you see users with similar sort
> requirements, except perhaps for batch reporting. For those batch jobs, a
> differently configured temp tablespace makes sense. Now, as a DBA, are you
> being sensible to swap normal users to that temporary tablespace, even if
> there's a problem like you outlined with the normal users temp? No, what you
> should be doing is creating a THIRD temp tablespace, which should be PDQ to do,
> and then swap users to that. Since the temp tablespace is stored at the user
> level, it's pretty damn hard for us to store history of temp tablespace, which
> is what you'd need to get around the issue any other way.

I agree it might not be sensible. Absolutely. But is it going to happen? Yup, I think so. And does Oracle then respect my explicit grants? Nope. That's the problem.

>
> Of course, if you are consolidating applications into a global single instance,
> then you won't end up with most users having the same sort requirements. But
> even there you can just have different temp tablespaces, and if one fails like
> you outlined, then create another one.

Assuming you've got the space available, of course. And that you remember.

>
> The problem to me boils down to how you perform your role as a DBA. Maybe in a
> later release we can add a _EXPERIENCE_LEVEL parameter so the database can make
> intelligent decisions for you, but in the meantime you can't abrogate your
> responsibilities.

Now, ordinarily, I'd completely agree with your sentiments here. It's just that, as far as I can see, it's the Oracle database itself that's just abbrogated it's responsibilities here. In the normal sense of the meaning of words, "default" is something that gets used when there's no other choice. So if I don't specify a temporary tablespace, the default steps up to the plate. But if I go to the bother of explicitly assigning   a user to a specific temporary tablespace, that ought to be the end of the matter.The fact that it isn't is the database's poor behaviour.

But there are bigger things to worry about, I agree.

Regards
HJR
>
> My $0.02 worth. Back to you! :)
>
> HTH. Additions and corrections welcome.
>
> Pete
>
> SELECT standard_disclaimer, witty_remark FROM company_requirements;
>
Received on Fri Jan 24 2003 - 16:07:25 CST