Re: storage problem

From: Jonathan Lewis <jonathan_at_jlcomp.demon.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2003 05:52:00 +0100
Message-ID: <b708rn$5ef$1$8302bc10@news.demon.co.uk>

One possibility:

The table has PCTFREE = 10.
Your rows have grown to take up ALL the free space You recreate the table with PCTFREE = 10

therefore you need ca. 10% more blocks

--
Regards

Jonathan Lewis
http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk

  The educated person is not the person
  who can answer the questions, but the
  person who can question the answers -- T. Schick Jr


One-day tutorials:
http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/tutorial.html

____UK_______April 22nd
____Denmark__May 21-23rd
____USA_(FL)_May 2nd

Three-day seminar:
see http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/seminar.html
____UK_(Manchester)_May
____Estonia___June (provisional)
____Australia_June (provisional)
____USA_(CA, TX)_August

The Co-operative Oracle Users' FAQ
http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/faq/ind_faq.html


"Yun Guan" <yguan_at_houston.rr.com> wrote in message
news:KaMka.46909$rd4.1480568_at_twister.austin.rr.com...


> I have one table anaylyzed using "compute statistics".  It has 2774

Blocks,


> which spans over 3 extents, chain_cnt=0, block_size 8192,

ave_row_len=47. I


> decided to move all data into one larger extent. So I dropped the

table,


> recreate the table with initial extent = 22M (> 2774 x 8/1024) with

all


> other storage parameters unchanged. After re-analyzing it, the table

has


> 3015 blocks and spans over 2 extents. I could not figure out why the

block


> number increases with chain_cnt =0. It spans over 2 extents, not 1

extent


> as I expected.

>

> Can anybody advise? Thanks in advance.

>

>

> --

> Allen Guan

> yguan_at_houston.rr.com

>

>

Received on Tue Apr 08 2003 - 23:52:00 CDT