Next extent with Locally managed tablespace on 9i

From: Norman Dunbar <Norman.Dunbar_at_lfs.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2002 09:57:26 +0100
Message-ID: <E2F6A70FE45242488C865C3BC1245DA70276987F@lnewton.leeds.lfs.co.uk>

Christain,

do not ever mix large and small objects in the same tablespace. You end up with a thing called free space fragmentation which can mean that you have over 100 MB of free space in a tablespace yet you cannot allocate 5 MB for a NEXT or INITIAL extent.

Read this document here for details on FSF :

http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/faq/RclmFreeSpace.html

In addition, the time taken to drop a segment is far less with LMT than DMT - no dictionary tables to get exclusive locks on and update for each extent.

Cheers,
Norman.

---

Norman Dunbar
Database/Unix administrator
Lynx Financial Systems Ltd.
mailto:Norman.Dunbar_at_LFS.co.uk

Tel: 0113 289 6265
Fax: 0113 289 3146
URL: http://www.Lynx-FS.com


-------------------------------------

-----Original Message-----
From: Christian M. [mailto:cm_at_sdv.fr]
Posted At: Monday, August 05, 2002 8:29 AM Posted To: server
Conversation: Next extent with Locally managed tablespace on 9i Subject: Re: Next extent with Locally managed tablespace on 9i

Ok !
But I wonder if it's not better to use DMT ! It's more flexible when we use
small and large objects in the same tablespace. Isn't it ?

It is really better to use LMT ???? Received on Mon Aug 05 2002 - 03:57:26 CDT