JusungYang_at_yahoo.com (Jusung Yang) wrote in message news:<130ba93a.0305072116.cfdd68e_at_posting.google.com>...
> Sybrand Bakker <gooiditweg_at_nospam.demon.nl> wrote in message news:<la2jbv0303b6ph87jag0le7o0s77d2frqc_at_4ax.com>...
> >
> > Anyway I noticed the optimizer doesn't create redundant buckets. If
> > you specify 250 buckets, and two is sufficient you get 2. That said
> > I'm tempted to specify the maximum always.
> >
> >
> > Sybrand Bakker, Senior Oracle DBA
> >
> > To reply remove -verwijderdit from my e-mail address
>
> Yes, most people would just use the default of 75 or the maximum of
> 254 buckets allowed by ORACLE. I would worry more about whether or not
> to create histograms than the number or buckets to use. Steve Adams
> actually has a script that may be helpful in deciding if the data in
> the table is skewed and histograms warranted, and if so, what the
> optimal # of buckets might be.
>
> http://www.ixora.com.au/newsletter/2001_04.htm
>
> I have not tried it yet though.
>
> - Jusung Yang
so buckets = number of distinct values correct?
Received on Thu May 08 2003 - 07:13:08 CDT
