Re: 32K block size tablespace for indexes
- From: Niall Litchfield <niall.litchfield@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: hrishys@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 07:51:27 +0000
most likely because they read some advice on it. Note I have an opinion on
this, but this might help with the background
Pros
====
http://searchoracle.techtarget.com/tip/0,289483,sid41_gci1008028_mem1,00.html
http://www.ixora.com.au/tips/block_size.htm
Against
=======
http://richardfoote.wordpress.com/2008/03/31/larger-block-index-tablespace-and-small-index-scans-performance-improvement-let-down/
(including
related papers and blogs)
There's been a whole host of, somewhat heated, discussions on this lately on
otn.
cheers
Niall
On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 7:03 AM, hrishy <hrishys@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi
>
> I have inherited a database where the indexes alone are in the 32k block
> tablespaces.
>
> Now without any documentation or anything for a hint i am just wundering
> why did the original designers design it like that?
>
> What are the pro's and cons of such a approach ?
>
> regards
> Hrishy
>
>
>
> --
> //www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
>
>
>
--
Niall Litchfield
Oracle DBA
http://www.orawin.info
Other related posts:
