RE: optimal storage parameters for heavy inserts tables

From: Lex de Haan <lex.de.haan_at_naturaljoin.nl>
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 13:02:10 +0200
Message-ID: <JFEEIGBIDOCCDALDIPLNMEKICBAA.lex.de.haan@naturaljoin.nl>

Hi Niall,

I agree -- it never hurts to use a prime number for any assignment algorithm based on a modulo function. on the other hand, the difference between choosing primes vs. non-primes only becomes apparent if the input numbers (process IDs) show some pattern...

cheers,
Lex.

-----Original Message-----

From: oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org
[mailto:oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org]On Behalf Of Niall Litchfield Sent: maandag 29 maart 2004 11:45
To: oracle-l_at_freelists.org
Subject: RE: optimal storage parameters for heavy inserts tables

I believe that the logic would be that chosing a prime number for number of freelists makes sense in that sessions should then be spread evenly across the available freelists.

Niall Litchfield
Oracle DBA
Audit Commission
+44 117 975 7805

This email contains information intended for the addressee only. It may be confidential and may be the subject of legal and/or
professional privilege. Any dissemination, distribution, copyright or use of this
communication without prior permission of the sender is strictly prohibited.

Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com

To unsubscribe send email to: oracle-l-request_at_freelists.org put 'unsubscribe' in the subject line.
--

Archives are at http://www.freelists.org/archives/oracle-l/ FAQ is at http://www.freelists.org/help/fom-serve/cache/1.html

Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com

Received on Mon Mar 29 2004 - 04:58:39 CST