Oracle-L: Re: system tablespace at 50 pct

From: Tim Gorman <tim_at_sagelogix.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 05:44:32 -0800
Message-ID: <F001.005CB57A.20030818054432@fatcity.com>

Good point! Another war story...

Some 6 years ago, during v7.3.3 timeframe, a DBA decided to modify INITIAL, NEXT, and PCTINCREASE of everything, including stuff in SYSTEM. Unfortunately, he chose first to do this in pre-PROD (to become PROD following week). Turns out he ran into a little-known bug (aren¹t they all, at first?) whereby any ALTER TABLE to the table named SYS.BOOTSTRAP$ causes a single bit to be set in the segment header block. This single bit being set causes ORA-00600 on instance startup.

You guessed it: the night before go live, they had a junior DBA stop and restart the instance at 12:30am. Poor guy stayed up all night, I got there around 6:00am, we found the cause and convinced Oracle Support to dial in and BBED the problem into submission by 1:00pm. MetaLink didn¹t exist in those days ‹ we had access to MetaLink¹s predecessor, called ³WebIV²...

Don¹t change the stuff in the SYSTEM tablespace, which includes the tablespace itself. Keep ³foreign stuff² (i.e. not belonging to SYS, SYSTEM, MDSYS, ORDSYS, OUTLN, etc) out of it and just leave it alone.

on 8/18/03 4:59 AM, rgaffuri_at_cox.net at rgaffuri_at_cox.net wrote:

> i thought you should leave the system table space to the defaults? Ive never
> touched System.
> 
> you really should change system to locally managed tablespaces?


>> > 

>> > From: Tim Gorman <tim_at_sagelogix.com>

>> > Date: 2003/08/17 Sun PM 11:19:23 EDT

>> > To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L <ORACLE-L_at_fatcity.com>

>> > Subject: Re: system tablespace at 50 pct_increase in 9i?

>> > 

>> > Better yet, use locally-managed SYSTEM tablespace and dispense with the

>> > issue altogether?

>> > 

>> >

>> > on 8/17/03 5:39 PM, Ryan at rgaffuri_at_cox.net wrote:
>> >

>>> > > any idea why oracle has the system tablespace using 50 pct_increase in
>>> 9i? I k
>>> > > now it did that in the past, but why not set it to zero?
>>> > >  
>>> > > Ryan
>>> > > 


>> > 

>> >

>> >
>> >

> 
> 
> Better yet, use locally-managed SYSTEM tablespace and dispense with the issue
> altogether?
> 
> 
> on 8/17/03 5:39 PM, Ryan at rgaffuri_at_cox.net wrote:
>

>> any idea why oracle has the system tablespace using 50 pct_increase in 9i? I
>> k now it did that in the past, but why not set it to zero?
>>
>> Ryan
>>

>
>

-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
-- 
Author: Tim Gorman
  INET: tim_at_sagelogix.com

Fat City Network Services    -- 858-538-5051 http://www.fatcity.com
San Diego, California        -- Mailing list and web hosting services
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
to: ListGuru_at_fatcity.com (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
(or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from).  You may
also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).

Received on Mon Aug 18 2003 - 08:44:32 CDT