RE: RE: Separate Indexes and Data

>
> From: "Jesse, Rich" <Rich.Jesse_at_qtiworld.com>
> Date: 2003/09/30 Tue PM 02:09:32 EDT
> To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L <ORACLE-L_at_fatcity.com>
> Subject: RE: RE: Separate Indexes and Data
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: rgaffuri_at_cox.net [mailto:rgaffuri_at_cox.net]
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2003 12:50 PM
> > To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
> > Subject: Re: RE: Separate Indexes and Data
> >
> >
> > the defrag paper was written back in 1998 I believe. Uniform
> > extents were a good solution pre-9i. We use them here on our
>
> I haven't been following this thread closely, but why are uniform extents no
> longer good for 9i?
>

Kyte recommends using auto-segment management

> > 8i databases. I stick with an uniform 5m extent size even
> > though I have tables that can fit into 128k extents, but feel
> > that the overall time savings by using 1 extent size makes up
> > for this.
> >
> > unfortunately unlike most systems we cannot break up our
> > tables into different tablespaces. We use transportable
> > tablespaces to batch publish data to data marts. New
> > tablespaces mean additional transportable tablespaces and
> > more places for stuff to go wrong.
> >
> > I saw some posts on dejanews recently from some pretty
> > experienced DBAs stating that there may be 'flaws' in
> > auto-allocate leading to poor extent sizes that leads to
>
> I don't believe it's a flaw, it's by design. At least according to Tom
> Kyte's new book (first chapter's on the web) it is, which is why I can't see
> me using it for our DBs.
>

Ive read the book. PCTINCREASE is basically set to 100% so the extent sizes double. Thats 'basically' how it works. I have seen some posts on dejanews saying it doesnt necessarily work this way and some people are finding large extent sizes with just a few extents and when tables are dropped this is leading to fragmentation. It hasnt happened to me, but the posts on dejanews were from some pretty good posters. So Im playing conservative. We also had one of the contributors here mention issues.

> > fragmentation. I believe Rachel Carmichael made a post on
> > here a few months back with the similiar experience(could be
> > wrong). Due to even the 'small' chance of flaws in
> > auto-allocate, Im thinking of waiting for version 10g before
> > using it. Just to be safe. Not worth risking a defrag on a
> > production system.
>
> Rich
>
> Rich Jesse System/Database Administrator
> rjesse_at_qtiworld.com Quad/Tech Inc, Sussex, WI USA
> --
> Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
> --
> Author: Jesse, Rich
> INET: Rich.Jesse_at_qtiworld.com
>
> Fat City Network Services -- 858-538-5051 http://www.fatcity.com
> San Diego, California -- Mailing list and web hosting services
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
> to: ListGuru_at_fatcity.com (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
> the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
> (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may
> also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).
>

-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
-- 
Author: <rgaffuri_at_cox.net
  INET: rgaffuri_at_cox.net

Fat City Network Services    -- 858-538-5051 http://www.fatcity.com
San Diego, California        -- Mailing list and web hosting services
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
to: ListGuru_at_fatcity.com (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
(or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from).  You may
also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).