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: Index compression vs. table compression

Re: Index compression vs. table compression

From: Niall Litchfield <niall.litchfield_at_dial.pipex.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2005 21:31:24 -0000
Message-ID: <41d9b990$0$16588$cc9e4d1f@news-text.dial.pipex.com>


"Howard J. Rogers" <hjr_at_dizwell.com> wrote in message news:41d57c31$0$4964$afc38c87_at_news.optusnet.com.au...
> DA Morgan wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> If you'll write another book, with material such as the above, I promise
>> to purchase a minimum of 50 copies in the first year.
>>
>> Thanks.
>
> Woof. You remind me of a lapdog.
>
> What 'material'? And did anything Jonathan write actually make a
> substantive difference to the recommendations being made?

Not perhaps to the CACHE/NOCACHE vs KEEP/RECYCLE discussion that you were having with Rick, but certainly the accurate description of the aging out of blocks from Oracle's caches is worth a public surfacing from time to time as so many seem to believe that Oracle uses a straightforward MRU (or possibly LRU) mechanism.

-- 
Niall Litchfield
Oracle DBA
http://www.niall.litchfield.dial.pipex.com 
Received on Mon Jan 03 2005 - 15:31:24 CST

Original text of this message

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