Re: locally managed tablespace & dictionary managed tablespace

From: Paul Brewer <paul_at_paul.brewers.org.uk>
Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 20:30:09 -0000
Message-ID: <3e10b0a3$1_2@mk-nntp-1.news.uk.worldonline.com>

"Niall Litchfield" <niall.litchfield_at_dial.pipex.com> wrote in message news:3e109d7a$0$231$cc9e4d1f_at_news.dial.pipex.com...
> "Jim Kennedy" <kennedy-down_with_spammers_at_attbi.com> wrote in message
> news:9mPP9.160621$qF3.11566_at_sccrnsc04...
> > Don't use locally managed tablespaces.
> > Jim
>
> Is locally a typo for dictionary in the above? I generally don't like
> absolute positions very much but I can see no reason whatsoever to retain
> DMT's.
>
> LMT's have the two following key advantages
>
> Massively reduced impact on the data dictionary.
> Elimination of extent fragmentation entirely (if using the uniform
clause).
>
> Now admittedly you might over allocate disk space for an LMT, in
comparison
> to a DMT, but that impact shouldn't be huge and as it avoids previously
> necessary downtime the cost is pretty well insignificant.
>
>
> --
> Niall Litchfield
> Oracle DBA
> Audit Commission UK
> *****************************************
> Please include version and platform
> and SQL where applicable
> It makes life easier and increases the
> likelihood of a good answer
> ******************************************
>
>

I concur. I think Jim meant 'Don't use DMT'. Significant typo, though, if that's the case...

Jim?

Regards,
Paul Received on Mon Dec 30 2002 - 14:30:09 CST