Re: schema health check

"TurkBear" <john.greco_at_dot.state.mn.us> wrote in message news:n4k9kv450o78225eresv9c6pviql6e7h93_at_4ax.com...
> Ed Stevens <nospam_at_noway.nohow> wrote:
>
> >On 21 Aug 2003 01:13:54 -0700, i_rahim_at_hotmail.com (Imran Rahim)
> >wrote:
> >
> >>"DJ" <nospamplease_at_goaway.com> wrote in message
news:<NrO0b.176$L15.69_at_newsfep4-winn.server.ntli.net>...
> >>> "Imran Rahim" <i_rahim_at_hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >>> news:e7519cfe.0308200710.315afa98_at_posting.google.com...
> >>> > Hi,
> >>> > I'm writing a small script that can be run against all my schemas to
> >>> > give me some sort of idea as to the "health" of each schema
> >>> >
> >>> > So far I've come up with
> >>>
> >>> > Indexes in Data Tblspce?
> >>> > Tables in Index Tblspce?
> >>>
> >>> Why you checking these?
> >>
> >>I am checking these because we seperate the disks for indexes and data
> >>to minimise contention
> >
> >Uh oh . . . .
> >
> >You might want to search the archives for some lengthy threads on
> >"Oracle Myths"
> >\\
>
> Yes, the contention issue has been well debunked, but the use of separate
tablespaces for data files and indexes still makes
> sense since the storage parameters will almost certainly be different..
> ( Just like multiple tablespaces for different types of data tables..)
>
>
>

thats why you have LMT's with uniform extents, you put objects of a smiliar size in the saem tablespace Received on Thu Aug 21 2003 - 12:04:23 CDT