Re: LOCALLY MANAGED EXTENT PERFORMANCE

Hi,

I haven't read the whole thread - but I'd just like to contribute the fact, that nowadays I save my time and create all tablespaces as autoallocate - and haven't seen any performance nor other problems so far. And I don't worry about the number or size of extents at all.

Tanel.

• Original Message ----- From: "Tim Gorman" <tim_at_evdbt.com> To: <oracle-l_at_freelists.org> Sent: Sunday, April 24, 2005 8:44 PM Subject: Re: LOCALLY MANAGED EXTENT PERFORMANCE

> Exactly why might a large number of extents be a bad thing? In other
> words,
> are you sure you are attaching the proper level of importance to the
> issue?
>
> To help figure out if this is true, can you describe exactly what
> operations
> might be affected by the number of extents, and how? Queries?
> Inserts/updates/deletes? Truncates? Drops? Monitoring queries?
>
> And, are you certain that autoLMT resolves the problem of "too many
> extents"? Isn't there an upper limit on extent size even with autoLMT?
> If
> so, then how is this different from intelligently sized uniform LMTs?
>
> My apologies for the Socratic questioning, but this thread contained too
> many assertions that need a little more examination...

--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l