Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid
HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US
 

Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.server -> Re: Oracle's Myth: keep tables and indexes in separate tablespaces

Re: Oracle's Myth: keep tables and indexes in separate tablespaces

From: Connor McDonald <connor_mcdonald_at_yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2003 19:31:01 +0800
Message-ID: <3F869875.6305@yahoo.com>


Noons wrote:
>
> "Howard J. Rogers" <hjr_at_dizwell.com> wrote in message news:3f858a85$0$28118$afc38c87_at_news.optusnet.com.au...
>
> >
> > Though I will go one step further, though it's only a logical conclusion
> > from what's already been discussed: one should be very careful about making
> > statements about what Oracle recommends or what its 'position' on something
> > is. Because the right hand quite frequently doesn't agree with what the
> > left hand has been writing.
> >
>
> Which reminded me of something:
> Do you know of ANY documentary evidence
> FROM Oracle about public synonyms being
> considerably heavier on performance than
> private ones or none?
> I just had a minor argument at work about
> precisely this and need to find something
> "heavier" than SA's site...
>
> --
> Cheers
> Nuno Souto
> wizofoz2k_at_yahoo.com.au.nospam

I thought Steve's proof was fairly definitive - more latching. If you aren't getting on 'latch free' or CPU, then by all means, let the pub syns fly. Otherwise, buyer beware.

C. Received on Fri Oct 10 2003 - 06:31:01 CDT

Original text of this message

HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US