Re: Oracle EE 12.1 standardize on bigfile tablespaces?
Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2017 10:57:18 -0600
Message-ID: <CAEueRAW7XG0cnOJrUTJSoo5RGisAMhYAobLce7KRWjV2z+ZwOA_at_mail.gmail.com>
Chris,
The only other downsize I have run into is transportable tablespaces. In
that case, if the data files are really big I usually use an OS utility
like split to break apart the files for transport.
One other weird thing I ran into is that rconfig doesn't take into account
However, in my opinion the advantages for bigfile far outweigh these few exceptions.
Seth Miller
On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 8:46 AM, Chris Stephens <cstephens16_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> Weekly level 0, daily level 1, hourly archivelogs. We plan to include
> section size in our backup scripts.
>
> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 8:19 AM Niall Litchfield <
> niall.litchfield_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> What is your backup approach? The unit of backup is generally the data
>> file. AFAIK RMAN parallel backup still doesn't automatically calculate
>> section size in the absence of declaring it. If your bigfiles aren't really
>> big, that's not a problem - but for terabyte-sized datafile backups to slow
>> media it will be.
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 1:59 PM, Chris Stephens <cstephens16_at_gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> We are in the process of building a new Exadata system that will host a
>> relatively large number of 12.1 EE RAC databases. We are trying to keep
>> everything as simple as possible and are currently planning on
>> standardizing on bigfile tablespaces for all application data.
>>
>> Are there any downsides/reasons to not do this?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> chris
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Niall Litchfield
>> Oracle DBA
>> http://www.orawin.info
>>
>
-- http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-lReceived on Mon Feb 20 2017 - 17:57:18 CET