Re: Oracle's Myth: keep tables and indexes in separate tablespaces

"Jitendra Patel" <coldrainandsnow_at_lycos.com> wrote in message news:7610580f.0310090351.1e152843_at_posting.google.com...
> > > So I guess I can see why lots of people think that it's best to separate
> > > indexes from tables. It doesn't mention that you should only separate them
> > > for administration purposes mainly.
>
> No, Eienstein. (I guess we know why you are unemployed).
>
> Imaging a system on a single disk, with the index on the innermost
> cylinder and the data on the outermost cylinder.

I'm "imaging" it. An unbalanced washing machine with your master Don's books in it.

>
> During a index range scan, the disk will vibrate like unbalanced
> washing machine.
>
> Try it on your PC, and you can watch this first hand. (If you actually
> own a computer, that is)

The argument is not about putting indexes and tables on one disk. Read the topic of this thread now and tell us if you believe if 1 tablespace = 1 disk? Read the threads in this newsgroup which debate this endlessly and then think about it (If you actually own a brain, that is)

>
> Yes, indexes belong on separate device, just like undo and online
> redo.
>
> A single disk cannot write to two placed at once.
>
> Had you any "real" experience, you would know that.
>
> I'll bet TUSC does not offer you work.
>
> Yeesh.

Anurag Received on Thu Oct 09 2003 - 07:36:07 CDT