Re: Table extents

Tony Hunt wrote:
>
> As far as I know they are the only two solutions I know, I have previously
> used the first one. But the second one sounds ingenious.
>
> Although I had one table 32,000 extents! hehe whoops!
>
> Database kept running but pretty much fell to it's knees and couldn;t return
> a query. Fortuneately the export command worked!
>
> Tony

Which makes the point: Why Bother over Extents? (As long as there are just a few; let's define few as -oh well- 1k? 4k?)
>
> "Travis" <trp9_at_home.com> wrote in message
> news:96um7.52656$MK5.29965517_at_news1.sttln1.wa.home.com...
> > I recently took over support for an app that has very little back end
> > documentation. An automated message was generated saying I had 3 tables
> > with "Extreme Fragmentation". Looking closer I saw that the following
> > tables has the following extents:
> > table1_ancientapp 89 extents
> > table14_ancientapp 9 extents
> > table22_ancientapp 8 extents

<snip>
Look at the names: are these tables being used? Is it worth all this? And for your extreme fragmentation: I know those reports; build in the V6
days, based on expert knowledge of V5 - not really an issue anymore.

-- 
Gtrz,

Frank van Bortel