Re: Creating datafiles for 500GB database

"Noons" <wizofoz2k_at_yahoo.com.au> wrote in message news:<407aa8ca$0$25655$afc38c87_at_news.optusnet.com.au>...
> "Daniel Morgan" <damorgan_at_x.washington.edu> wrote in message
> news:1081778058.701988_at_yasure...
>
> >
> > While on this subject ... what is the point of this parameter and
> > others like it? Why would any DBA want to specify something that
> > would later limit their flexibility? It seems pointless to me.
>
>
> It "reserves" space on the control file for
> datafiles up to its limit. It can therefore have
> a great impact on the total size of the control file.
> Which may or may not have an impact on other stuff you
> can do and ultimately how fast the control file can be
> written/save/restored.
>
> And why on Earth hasn't it been automated yet beats
> the heck out of me! It's not like it's rocket science
> to do it...

Are you sure this is all it does? I would think there is some impact on kernel requirements, for unix systems, at least (maxfiles, ninode, nfiles). Don't know much about windows, but there must be some impact on the OS of opening all those files at the same time ( http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;163202 maybe proves it irrelevant?).

I think you are basically right, this all shows that this parameter is a historical vestige.

jg

--
@home.com is bogus.
http://www.laser-zentrum-hannover.de/de/publikationen/pressemitteilungen/2004/images/040406_papierpuzzle_100_Teile.jpg