RE: Choosing data file size for a multi TB database? (just the bit about 90% utilization)

<snip>

your OS vendor. HP I know is not happy if you exceed 90% utilization on a mount point.
<snip>

I'm not sure what you mean by "not happy" but the default default inode plus bad spot allocation on many UNIX descendents is still 10%.

Most badspot mapping is done in the hardware now, and 10% has become a ridiculous amount of storage to dedicate to information about the name, dlm, size, etc., starting point, and various other metadata about the list of files on a mount point.

This is especially true if a mount point is dedicated to one or a modest number of files, as should be the case on mount points holding Oracle data files.

So, IF the unhappiness you're referring to is this 10% reservation, then by all means build your mountpoints for Oracle data files with much less allocated to inode space. The exact syntax may vary by platform, so I'm not even going to start. If you converse with your Hardware/OS vendor, be certain they understand the question or you'll just get back "Oh, you shouldn't monkey with that" or some other such nonsense. 10% is a whole lot to toss down the drain for inode storage.

Then again, you might be writing about something entirely different.

Regards,

mwf

--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l