It isn't. And a good thing too.
Regards
HJR
"Noons" <nsouto_at_optusnet.com.au.nospam> wrote in message
news:Xns931AF238EF77Dmineminemine_at_210.49.20.254...
> "Richard Foote" <richard.foote_at_bigpond.com> wrote in
> news:Qd70a.41251$jM5.103641_at_newsfeeds.bigpond.com and I quote:
>
> > freelisted segment. By effectively making the block accessed for inserts
> > "random" (providing there is sufficient space), you reduce this problem.
> > Note that multiple freelists kinda have this effect as well (that is
> > increased numbers of empty blocks below the HWM)
>
>
> Cool, I can live with this. Like it a lot, in fact.
>
> > The price you pay is the "nth" block being selected rather than the
"next"
> > block.
>
> Cheap.
>
> >
> > BTW, I have actually found ASSM tables to have as good (and in some
cases )
> > better performance with regard to FTS than with non ASSM tablespaces.
These
> > are well populated tables, each with something like 500-600 64K extents.
> >
>
>
> Is ASSM the default now with 9r2? I thought it wasn't,
> but I may well be wrong.
>
> --
> Cheers
> Nuno Souto
> nsouto_at_optusnet.com.au.nospam
Received on Thu Feb 06 2003 - 09:08:07 CST
