RE: Autoextend or not?
- From: <Joel.Patterson@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <jeffthomas24@xxxxxxxxx>, <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2009 13:20:22 -0400
Not that I am aware of... but, I only implemented ASM once so far, on a windows
box for a short amount of time, and that was about three years ago.
Joel Patterson
Database Administrator
904 727-2546
-----Original Message-----
From: oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Jeffery Thomas
Sent: Monday, April 20, 2009 11:41 AM
To: oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Autoextend or not?
Does having your storage managed by ASM changes the autoextend
argument in any way?
Jeff
On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 8:19 AM, <Joel.Patterson@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I agree with Jared, that if space is not an issue, then you probably
> won't encroach on the f/s size, (by which I figure f/s size means out of
> space). I have 8K block sizes, so my files are not going to grow past
> 32Gbs, and if they did, well... another is going to be added, and if we
> are up past 95% full, then the sysadmin is going to add another LUN.
>
> Sometimes however when we begin to approach the 95% full mark and
> beyond, somebody decides to run some ad hoc query or something and boom,
> undo and/or temp explode out the door... By the time they run up to
> 8Gbs, I figure its time they failed (at least the first time) before
> they eat up the next 24Gbs for nothing. Or worse they finish after
> using say 30Gbs.
>
> So, for now since I have not massive 'loading' of data, autoextend on is
> working fine, and if needed limit the size of temp and undo to prevent
> runaways.
>
> Joel Patterson
> Database Administrator
> 904 727-2546
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Other related posts:
