Re: Choosing data file size for a multi TB database?
- From: Paul Baumgartel <paul.baumgartel@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 12:17:44 -0400
Good advice. These are known as "bigfile" tablespaces (the conventional kind
are now called "smallfile").
On 8/30/05, Allen, Brandon <Brandon.Allen@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> You might want to consider "largefile" tablespaces if you're using 10g -
> these are tablespaces that have one and only one datafile, which can be up
> to 4,294,967,296 (roughly 4 billion - a.k.a 4GB) BLOCKS, which means a
> single file can be 8-to-128TB (terabytes) depending on your block size (2k
> to 32k). The other nice thing about these is that you can control the files
> with ALTER TABLESPACE commands, e.g. ALTER TABLESPACE BIG1 RESIZE 10TB;
> ALTER TABLESPACE BIG2 AUTOEXTEND ON NEXT 100G MAXSIZE 10TB;
>
> Disclaimer: I've never actually used largefile tablespaces myself - just
> read about them :-)
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Branimir Petrovic
> Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2005 4:33 AM
> To: oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Choosing data file size for a multi TB database?
>
>
> How would you approach task of sizing data files for a project that will
> start with
> a 1TB database but may relatively quickly grow to stabilize at around 10TB
> mark?
>
> Obvious options are:
>
> - start with many smallish files (like 2GB each), then add some
> thousands more
> as the database grows,
> or
> - start with a number of largish data files (in 10-100GB range each),
> then add
> more such files to accommodate growth.
>
> Neither of the above options look very desirable (to me at least). First
> option
> might be bad choice with checkpointing in mind, but the second option is
> not
> the
> winner if data files ever needs to be moved around. Anyway some initial
> choice must
> be made, and all I'd like at this moment is not to give perilous initial
> advice...
> (admission: once the "ball" starts rollin', this bastard ain't gonna be
> mine:))
>
> So from practical perspective - what would be the least troublesome
> choice?
>
> Branimir
>
>
>
> FYI I - OS platform is the darkest secret at this point, as is the
> hardware
> specs
> (no-one can tell, early signs of "well communicated, well managed" project
> are all
> there)
>
>
> FYI II - I've never had to deal with DBs much bigger than 100GB, thus the
> need for
> "reality check"..
> --
> //www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
>
> Privileged/Confidential Information may be contained in this message or
> attachments hereto. Please advise immediately if you or your employer do not
> consent to Internet email for messages of this kind. Opinions, conclusions
> and other information in this message that do not relate to the official
> business of this company shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed
> by it.
>
> --
> //www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
>
--
Paul Baumgartel
paul.baumgartel@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Other related posts:
