Is this possibly a valid use case for larger tablespace block size? On 23/04/2014 4:29 PM, Kenny Payton wrote:
Thanks.Unfortunately the data and access patterns change pretty frequently.  Another reason we find ourselves in this situation.On Apr 23, 2014 6:02 PM, "Sayan Malakshinov" <xt.and.r@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:xt.and.r@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 12:56 AM, Kenny Payton <k3nnyp@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:k3nnyp@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote: I know a lot of the tricks for avoiding chained rows and migrated rows but the only trick I know of to element these intra or inter block chained rows is to break the table intomultiple tables or the row into multiple rows.ÂSometimes might be helpful to redefine table with moving less-used columns to the ends of rows. It allows to reduce extra-work if most queries use only the first columns