Re: Are one row, one column tables "acceptable"?

> Would it be wise, for backup/recovery reasons, to create a tablespace that
> is read-only? AFAIK, Oracle doesn't back up such a tablespace. Or, is that
> the idea behind a static table? Any idea as to how small of a tablespace I
> should create? Can I create a tablespace of 1 block size (8k)?

No - IIRC the smallest tablespace is about 50K - 6 blocks. Is disk space that expensive where you are that you need to be worried about it to this extent? Also, I'm concerned - the way you ask the question leads me to believe you design 1 table per tablespace. Is this true?

In any designs I have done, there is always at least one tablespace for miscellaneous tables. Many applications tend to have a few large tables, and then dozens or hundreds of small 'supporting' tables. In my experience, these tend to be relatively static, updated once a month to once a few years. I simply put most of these types of tables into one tablespace & then heavily optimize the access. Yes, this is a throwback from Oracle 6 & 7 and before high efficiency disk arrays but it certainly seems to have simplified admin for me. Received on Tue Apr 08 2003 - 17:35:14 CDT