Re: Anybody have experience of online reorg tools ?

"Eric vd Spoel" <EpvdSpoel_at_hccnet.nl> wrote in message news:b9m9qf$m4f$1_at_news.hccnet.nl...
> Jim,
>
> SAP advises to use Locally Managed Tablespaces(LMT's). This is not only
> faster in use but you don't have to worry about different next extent
sizes
> anymore. If you have a tablespaces with tables or indexes which have large
> next extent sizes you can use the option uniform extent size, example:
320
> Mb

Bad example! Extent sizes should be 1Mb, 8Mb, 64Mb, 256Mb or 512Mb (which is what autoallocate would do, given half a chance). Reason? That's a nice range of sizes, and if you start trying to fit sizes within those, it suggest you are trying to micro-manage LMTs... and the entire point of LMTs is that they free DBAs from worrying about micro-managing extent sizes (and, incidentally, you will be extremely hard pressed to measure ANY performance improvement from moving to LMTs. Unless you had absolutely dire contention for the UET$ and FET$ data dictionary tables, and tables auto-extending like they were crazy, there won't be one. LMTs are excellent things, not because of any performance improvements, but because for the first time we can genuinely say 'I couldn't care how many extents you acquire [within reason], and therefore I won't strive very officiously to corrall your extent usage into 'acceptable' limits'.)

> Btw If you move a table to the TS it is in now, you rebuild it and so
> winning the space you want.

It is an expensive, off-line, option, however, so beware.

Regards
HJR
>
> Eric
>
> "Neil Cudd" <neil_at_cudd.demon.co.uk> schreef in bericht
> news:190d457f.0305082342.2b28455a_at_posting.google.com...
> > Hi Jim,
> > performance is really not the driver here. Trying to reclaim disk
> > space on large systems and apply uniform extent management where it is
> > not at the moment.
> > Thanks,
> > Neil.
> >
> >
> > "Jim Kennedy" <kennedy-down_with_spammers_at_attbi.com> wrote in message
> news:<bZDua.539829$Zo.115007_at_sccrnsc03>...
> > > Also ask yourself why are you doing this? Measure the performance
> before
> > > and after and see if it really made a difference.
> > > Jim
> > >
>
> > > "Antoine BRUNEL" <antoinebrunel/yahoo.fr> wrote in message
> > > news:3ebaf8e0$0$7947$79c14f64_at_nan-newsreader-01.noos.net...
> > > > Beginning with 8i, and even mostly with 9i, you are now able to move
> > > objects
> > > > without altering their availabity:
> > > >
> > > > alter table XX move....
> > > > alter index XXX rebuild ...
> > > >
> > > > theses SQL can be parallelized (degree X), nologging.
> > > >
> > > > In 92, there are packages specific for online table reorg.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > "Neil Cudd" <neil_at_cudd.demon.co.uk> a écrit dans le message de
> > > > news:190d457f.0305081632.4a38cbec_at_posting.google.com...
> > > > > I'm to make recommendations and was wondering if anybody out there
> has
> > > > > experience of an online reorg tools and would care to share their
> > > > > experiences.
> > > > >
> > > > > My platform is primarily 9i 64bit on aix 5.1 - SAP systems.
> > > > >
> > > > > Any pointers gratefully received.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > >
> > > > > Neil.
> > > >
> > > >
>
>
Received on Sun May 11 2003 - 21:43:17 CDT