Re: Myth revisited ...

"Noons" <wizofoz2k_at_yahoo.com.au.nospam> wrote in message news:3fb74440$1$13634$afc38c87_at_news.optusnet.com.au...
> There was a thread on Oracle-L about this a few weeks
> ago. Funny how these things come around.
>
> The consensus seemed to be you can get a measure
> of better indexing (less b-tree levels) if you put
> the index in a tablespace with a large block size.
> Therefore reducing I/O even more for the indexes.

http://www.ixora.com.au/tips/block_size.htm

has a pretty good discussion on large block size and indexed access paths. I'm not sure how realistic it would be to expect b-level reduction for most indexes but for range scans and the like the argument would seem to hold well.

> As for tables in tablespaces of larger block sizes,
> I can see an advantage when dealing with LOBs: you get
> (hopefully) more "in-lined" rows. It also may be
> advantageous for IOTs.

I'm not sure that I necessarily think that in-line LOBS are *ever* a good idea. ISTM that in nearly all the cases where an inline LOB would be appropriate, then a Varchar field would probably be a better thing to do.

--
Niall Litchfield
Oracle DBA
Audit Commission UK
*****************************************
Please include version and platform
and SQL where applicable
It makes life easier and increases the
likelihood of a good answer
******************************************