"Gabriel Gonzalez" <no-spam_at_no-spam.com> wrote in message
news:nAqdnXD1pf0LzgijXTWcow_at_giganews.com...
> > Block size is a function of filesystem, not whim, application type, or
> > anything else.
>
> I'll agree and disagree with you there...
>
> I agree because block size should not be set on a whim, nor should it be
an
> unfounded guess.
>
> I disagree because, for example, on a file system that has a 64k physical
> block size, you could set Oracle's block size to (again, for example):
>
> 1) 8K with block multi-read of 8,
>
> 2) 2k with block multi-read of 32,
>
> 3) 64k with block multi-read of 1.
However your original suggestion was to use different block sizes in
different tablespaces within the same db. Whilst you can do this, you cannot
AFAIK set the multiblock read count on a per tablespace level making the
above argument somewhat moot.
--
Niall Litchfield
Oracle DBA
Audit Commission UK
Received on Thu Apr 10 2003 - 10:35:21 CDT
