Re: should initial = next?

"Nuno Souto" <nsouto_at_nsw.bigpond.net.au.nospam> wrote in message news:3a811d4c.3149754_at_news-server...
> On Wed, 7 Feb 2001 18:52:53 +1100, "Howard J. Rogers"
> <howardjr_at_www.com> wrote:
>
> >All of which misses the point: 1000 extents is still a bad idea because
 of
> >the havoc it plays with the UET$ and FET$ tables in the data dictionary,
> >which will impact on every segment in the database. For that reason, I
> >still advice no more than 6 extents per segment in dictionary managed
> >tablespace (though disaster is not going to strike if you let it creep up
 to
> >10 or 20). In locally managed tablespace, it's not an issue. Have as
 many
> >extents as you like.
> >
>
> Have you played with sql.bsq? I know, ORACLE says "don't", but it's
> definitely worth it in this day and age of applications with thousands
> of tables, hundreds of columns per table and heaps of indexes over
> many columns. Those default values for cluster allocation in the
> default sql.bsq are *WAY* out of date. It doesn't matter how many
> extents you have, the darn thing is gonna be so chained anyway it's
> not even funny!

I agree with you, and if my first name was "Steve" and my surname was "Adams", I might feel very confident about hacking around in sql.bsq. But they ain't, so I don't!!!

And accordingly, 6 is the max I'm prepared to live with out of the box.

Regards
HJR
>
>
> Cheers
> Nuno Souto
> nsouto_at_bigpond.net.au.nospam
> http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/the_Den/index.html
Received on Wed Feb 07 2001 - 05:40:29 CST