Re: changing initial extent size with hash partitioned index

"Howard J. Rogers" <hjr_at_dizwell.com> wrote in message news:<40ac0333$0$31678$afc38c87_at_news.optusnet.com.au>...
> samuels_at_blue.seas.upenn.edu wrote:
>
> > there's no need to be rude.
>
>
> And what, pray, do you consider rude?
>
> I asked why you were mucking around with extent sizes when the whole
> point of locally managed tablespace is that that sort of waste of time
> is old hat and no longer necessary. Only an overly-sensitive person
> indeed could construe the suggestion that they have missed the point of
> LMT as being rude.
>
> Or perhaps it was the word "bloody"? In which case, do you live in Utah
> or something??
>
> > version is 8.1.7.4.0, platform is aix5.1
>
> Good. Always post this information. It frequently makes a difference to
> the answers you might receive. Or was it rude of me to ask you for it?
>
> > my question has more to do with the fact that when rebuilding a non-partitioned or range partitioned index,
> > an initial extent size is allowed, and with a hash partitioned index it is not (apparently).
> >
> > if you can't post a well-mannered constructive follow-up, then you shouldn't at all.
>
> And my reply to you was: Why are you trying to change an initial extent
> in the first place? A question you haven't answered.
>
> That a normal index *can* have a storage clause supplied when rebuilding
> doesn't mean you *should* supply a storage clause. Still less that you
> should actually rebuild the thing.
>
> In 8i and above, *no* segment should have a storage clause supplied,
> ever. That's the wonder of LMTs. It was also good practice even in 8.0
> with the MINIMUM EXTENT clause, but results were less predictable.
>
> Neither would I take the syntactical abilities of a normal index as any
> kind of indication of the syntactical capabilities of a partitioned index.
>
> So your question has more to do with the fact that you dislike
> encountering a "limitation" when in fact no limitation actually exists,
> and that you are encountering it whilst engaged in an activity that in
> 8i and above is largely redundant (ie. worrying about extent sizes).
>
> Now I don't know what you class as rude or polite, well-mannered or
> ill-mannered. But the above is accurate. So you can take it or leave it
> as you will.
>
> HJR
Howard,

He's a UPenn alumnus.
Its not your fault, its not his fault, it just is.

Back in the day of playing ulty, they earned a phrase just for them:

"strip, travel, pick, suck my dick".

They have no honor.

Pd Received on Thu May 20 2004 - 00:54:53 CDT