Re: Segment management auto clause

From: Richard Foote <richard.foote_at_bigpond.com>
Date: Sat, 17 May 2003 00:09:04 +1000
Message-ID: <L16xa.35562$1s1.514738@newsfeeds.bigpond.com>

"Jonathan Lewis" <jonathan_at_jlcomp.demon.co.uk> wrote in message news:b9vu46$1dv$1$8300dec7_at_news.demon.co.uk...
>
>
> Here's another square hole to think about.
> If the data falls into a naturally sequential pattern, and you switch
> to
> ASSM to avoid contention on inserts; then any index that echoed the
> sequential pattern has suddenly acquired a much higher clustering
> factor - which means the optimiser is less likely to use it on range-
> based queries.
>

Hi Jonathan,

Reminds me of a conversation I had with a colleague a little time ago when we were discussing something similar. Except it was the "trade-off" between benefits in maintaining as good a clustering factor as possible for an important index vs. avoiding BBWs with increased number of freelists /freelist groups.

Then the subject of ASSM came up :)

As Ziggy Stardust sang, "It ain't easy...."

Cheers

Richard Received on Fri May 16 2003 - 09:09:04 CDT