True, and something I hadn't thought of. I suppose Tb databases are a bit
of a terra icognita (pun intended) for some of us.
Regards
HJR
--
Resources for OracleT: www.geocities.com/howardjr2000
=========================================
"Niall Litchfield" <n-litchfield_at_audit-commission.gov.uk> wrote in message
news:3bcebb55$0$225$ed9e5944_at_reading.news.pipex.net...
> "Dusan Bolek" <pagesflames_at_usa.net> wrote in message
> news:1e8276d6.0110180233.2a020d7a_at_posting.google.com...
> > Maybe I've made one puzzling statement. When I've said about 5GB files
> > I meant up to 5 GB files. I've made remark about careful layout
> > planning, all depends on how data are stored in database. My idea is
> > not to divide 0.5TB with 5GB and then use 100 of 5GB files, that's
> > just all about averages or maybe high boundaries. These big files
> > should be used only for big objects, usually in data warehouse are
> > only few extremely big tables. These giant tables should be
> > partitioned through number of huge files. However in all warehouses
> > are also big number of smaller tables with business logic etc., these
> > tables should be treated as common tables in typical Oracle
> > environment. There is no need to have these in 5GB data files.
>
> I ought to preface this by saying we do not run terabyte sized
> datawarehouses (yet). I however tend to keep my datafiles all the same
size
> (2gb as it happens). My only real reason for doing this is that then if
you
> do decide to move files around you know that you will have room for them.
I
> also tend to agree with Howard about the backup requirements, but I guess
if
> you have terabytes of storage you are likely to have pretty whizzy backup
> solutions as well.
>
>
> --
> Niall Litchfield
> Oracle DBA
> Audit Commission UK
>
>
>
Received on Thu Oct 18 2001 - 14:52:07 CDT
