Re: unbalanced indexes -- common wisdom?

"RSH" <RSH_Oracle_NOSPAM_at_worldnet.att.net> wrote in message news:<D6VG8.30535$D41.1196339_at_bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>...
> And ALTER INDEX REBUILD.
>
> "Sybrand Bakker" <postbus_at_sybrandb.demon.nl> wrote in message
> news:ueo6681j7sjn38_at_corp.supernews.com...
> > ALTER INDEX <index_name> COALESCE
> > to free up space

So COALESCE, or REBUILD (or, maybe both?)

I know that fragmented index can be defragmented, I'm writing that it's maybe a good idea to give an option to create a normal index that reuses free index blocks immediately. It is possible to have an index that doesn't require maintenance, why am I deprived that option? Index maintenance is just yet another miniscule issue on a long DBA list. Received on Thu May 23 2002 - 11:36:47 CDT