Re: create table initial max ?

Kenneth Koenraadt wrote:

>>>I agree with Howard, this is a crazy request, but slightly funny, so
>>>here goes:
>>>
>>>1) Make sure the autoextend is off for all the datafiles of the TBS in
>>>question.
>>>
>>>2) Run this :
>>>   create table foo(c1 number(10)) tablespace footbs;
>>>begin
>>>  while true loop
>>>  execute immediate ('alter table foo allocate extent');
>>> end loop;
>>>end;
>>>/
>>>
>>>and when it hits ORA-01653, you're done.
>>>
>>>- Kenneth Koenraadt
>>
>>Not what he asked for, Kenneth. He asked to fill a tablespace by 
>>specifying as big an initial extent size as possible, not for a table to 
>>merely fill up all the available space in a tablespace by extending as 
>>often as possible.
>>
>>Regards
>>HJR

No it's not. In one case you create a single extent table that occupies a large chunk of contiguous space. In another, you create multiple extents that are (probably) discontiguous. Just because Oranges and Apples are both fruit doesn't mean they are the same.

> And I think you interfer too much, Howard.

"Interfere"... uh, you mean you don't like it when I point out, oh-so-gently or otherwise that you are wrong? Fair enough. But I think we should call a spade a spade: "I think you correct me too much, Howard" is how that sentence should really have been written.

Which may or may not be true... but is in any case easily fixed by you not posting stuff which is technically incorrect, no?

> And I think you consider this newgroup your personal property.

What you think, Kenneth, is in this case neither here nor there. Particularly because it is 100% wrong. You posted something which was not what the poster asked for. That's all I pointed out. Nicely. Politely. With "regards". Quite how one construes that to be a personal claim on the newsgroup, I have no idea. Clue: it isn't.

> And I think that no matter how much you know about Oracle it does not
> justify such appearance.

As you have just written, this is not about my appearance. This is about what you *think* is my appearance. And I can do nothing about what you think.

> Why ? You could be a guru, well-known for your helpfull-ness and
> knowledge.

Perhaps I just want to be a happy cat owner that enjoys flying planes and hates anything with more than four legs? Thank you, in short, for determining what my ambitions should be, but your decisions aren't actually appropriate for me.

>Instead you become a social handgranate which no-one wants
> to deal with.

Strange. If only it were true. 85 emails a week is not what I'd call "no-one". And my training appointments are as full as I could want them to be. But that's fine. You can get personal if you want. It's strangely a common occurrence to say how abusive *I* am, how arrogant *I* am, how unprofessional *I* am, immediately after I point out that what someone has posted was technically wrong.

Read what the original poster requested. Read your reply. Spot the mismatch, that's all I was saying. Nicely.

> I know that kind of person from my career. They are excellent
> technicians, but noone wants to work with them and they are left in
> the corner and eventually fired. Don't become one of them.
>
> - Kenneth Koenraadt

Thank you for your concern.

Now: about the original post. Care to write a little procedure that will do what the poster actually asked for, rather than what you assume will end up achieving the same result in the end? That is, search for the biggest single piece of free space (so dba_free_space is probably required) and then allocate that as the table's initial extent. And once you've done that, perhaps you'd care to explain to the OP why doing it is crazy, as you agreed it was.

HJR Received on Sun Dec 12 2004 - 09:57:53 CST