RE: db block size
- From: Paul Drake <discgolfdba@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 10:57:00 -0700 (PDT)
--- Pete Sharman <peter.sharman@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> You just don't. Different block size tablespaces
> are there for transportab=
> le tablespaces only. Absolutely zero benefit
> outside of that.
>
> One day soon I hope this message spreads a bit more
> broadly. Maybe we shou=
> ld put it in a FAQ somewhere. :(
>
> Pete
Pete,
I was planning on using a 2KB block size for tables
with a large amount of DML contention. Yes, a
re-design would be better, but in the short run (which
I'm sure that you dislike that phrase very much) we'd
have less concurrency issues if the rows were spread
over a larger number of blocks, while not using lots
more 8KB blocks to do so.
are you saying that there are no exceptions to the
"Absolutely zero benefits" clause above?
Paul
----------------------------------------------------------------
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
----------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe send email to: oracle-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
put 'unsubscribe' in the subject line.
--
Archives are at //www.freelists.org/archives/oracle-l/
FAQ is at //www.freelists.org/help/fom-serve/cache/1.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Other related posts:
