From: "Mark Malakanov" Newsgroups: comp.databases.oracle.server References: <3ae718c9.260531804@news.qwest.net> Subject: Re: Disk paritions, 36g/4 or 36gig/1 Lines: 32 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Message-ID: Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 04:34:36 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.114.120.54 X-Complaints-To: abuse@home.net X-Trace: news3.rdc1.on.home.com 988259676 24.114.120.54 (Wed, 25 Apr 2001 21:34:36 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 21:34:36 PDT Organization: Excite@Home - The Leader in Broadband http://home.com/faster If performance is concern, it will be better to put redo log files to separate disk(s) closer to periferial cilinders. I wold make following d1 - part1:the even redo members, part2:OS d2 - part1:the odd redo members, part2:swap d3 - part1:controlfile1, part2:tables,indexes d4 - part1:controlfile2, part2:indexes,tables Idea is to completely separate redo-log activity from other I/O activity. If performance is not concern, make 1 big partition on every disk. -- ----------------------------------------------------- Thanks, Mark "Chuck Carson" ÓÏÏÂÝÉÌ/ÓÏÏÂÝÉÌÁ × ÎÏ×ÏÓÔÑÈ ÓÌÅÄÕÀÝÅÅ: news:3ae718c9.260531804@news.qwest.net... > > I am building an Oracle DB and am limited to 4 - 36gig disks. > > Disk 2 is for index space, and disk 3 and 4 are for data space. My > question is, is it better to create one large parition on each disk, > or break it up into smaller partitions? The schema for this database > is not very complex so segregating various tables and indexes is not > really necessary, I will simply have all indexes on 1 spindle, and the > data separated across 2 spindles. > > Thanks, > CC