RE: db block size
- From: "Lex de Haan" <lex.de.haan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2004 21:11:14 +0200
Hi Tom,
please allow me to repeat what my beloved ex-colleague Pete Sharman
explained before,
in his well-known concise and subtle style:
Oracle has always positioned this feature to enhance transportable
tablespaces (TTS) --
which is certainly not "on the edge" functionality, I would say;
I think TTS is both pretty powerful and pretty useful.
so it is kind of unfair to label it as close to useless as a conclusion of
this email thread?
Kind regards,
Lex.
---------------------------------------------
visit my website at http://www.naturaljoin.nl
---------------------------------------------
-----Original Message-----
This sounds like one of those "efficiencies on the edges" discussion.
Everybody makes great points. But the real end result might be a gain in
efficiency by about a decimal of a percent.
Another great Oracle innovation that *may be* used in about 1% of the
installations. My gut feeling is that Oracle is adding functionality that
not many of us would use.
-- Binary/unsupported file stripped by Ecartis --
-- Type: text/x-vcard
-- File: Lex de Haan.vcf
----------------------------------------------------------------
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 http://www.freelists.org/archives/oracle-l/
FAQ is at http://www.freelists.org/help/fom-serve/cache/1.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------
- References:
- RE: db block size
- From: Mercadante, Thomas F
Other related posts:
- » db block size
- » RE: db block size
- » RE: db block size
- » Re: db block size
- » Re: db block size
- » Re: db block size
- » Re: db block size
- » Re: db block size
- » Re: db block size
- » RE: db block size
- » RE: db block size
- » Re: db block size
- » Re: db block size
- » RE: db block size
- » Re: db block size
- » RE: db block size
- » Re: db block size
- » Re: db block size
- » RE: db block size
- » RE: db block size
- » RE: db block size
- » Re: db block size
- » Re: db block size
- » Re: db block size
- RE: db block size
- From: Mercadante, Thomas F