Re: Unable to extend temp on non temp tablespace

Note the word "convenient". I wouldn't insist that it was a mistake to have such a large tablespace - your comment about ease of
management is the critical one, and that's a feature which should always be given serious consideration.

A couple of points in the discussion though are:

Although the tablespace is, as you say, a "more logical" concept, there are still a couple of physical activities that you might want to associate with a tablespace. In particular, the tablespace is often the 'sensible' minimum unit of backup - (e.g. for a subset restore) even though the file is the 'actual' minimum unit of backup.

Many sites now use rman, but if you don't then you still need to do 'alter tablespace begin/end backup' to take a hot backup - and for the duration of the backup you tend to increase the rate of redo. From a purely theoretical basis, for randomly scattered block changes, the excess redo is likely to grow at an n-squared rate compared to the size of the file.

--
Regards

Jonathan Lewis
http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk

Coming soon a new one-day tutorial:
Cost Based Optimisation
(see http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/tutorial.html )

Next Seminar dates:
(see http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/seminar.html )

____England______January 21/23
____USA_(CA, TX)_August


The Co-operative Oracle Users' FAQ
http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/faq/ind_faq.html





Rick Denoire <100.17706_at_germanynet.de> wrote in message
<8p0k1v4q6e8plpngdab122sgagarule0sj_at_4ax.com>...


>"Jonathan Lewis" <jonathan_at_jlcomp.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>

>>

>>Following on from Niall's comment -

>>it isn't really very convenient to have a

>>single 48GB tablespace for your indexes,

>>so you may take this opportunity to

>>create several small tablespaces and

>>distribute the indexes sensibly between them.

>

>I am a little bit surprised by this statement since I always thought

>that a tablespace is more a logical concept in order to ease

>management as long as all files belonging to it share suitable common

>properties. I really can't understand why having several tablespaces

>of the same "type" would be better in any way. But I am very willing

>to learn.

>



... cut ....



>

files can be


>distributed on different devices while still belonging to the same

>tablespace.

>