RE: Clustering factor smaller than table blocks.

Bernard

> If I read it correctly then a table whose number of blocks in PK
> inferior to number of blocks reported in dba_Tables had endure
> delete.

Two remarks:

1. "number of block" should be "number of referenced blocks".
2. As Jonathan already wrote, with ASSM there could be non-initialized blocks below the HWM. In addition, with FSSM, since the HWM is increased by 5 blocks at time (except for the first 5 blocks and when _BUMP_HIGHWATER_MARK_COUNT has been set) you could have up to 5 empty blocks ***per segment and free list group*** which are not referenced by the index yet.

HTH
Chris

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