Re: Oracle 10g & tablespaces

Matthias Hoys wrote:

> I meant that there are a lot of "holes" in our tablespace map because of the
> large differences between the initial/next extent size of all the objects. I
> don't know if we will see a performance gain after the migration but we will
> definitely win diskspace (30-40%) by "compacting" the data.

The subject says 10g. That means you are using LMT. So before you go fixing "holes" and claiming that initial and next extent sizes are different ... explain how you have done whatever it is you've done. What is your storage strategy? Because the above statements just don't compute.

-- 
Daniel A. Morgan
Relational theory is not something that is simply a nice-to-have.
http://www.psoug.org
damorgan_at_x.washington.edu
(replace x with u to respond)