RE: Relating actual object size to Storage parameters

  • From: "Paul Vincent" <Paul.Vincent@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: "Oracle-L@Freelists. Org (E-mail)" <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 12:22:33 +0100

I'm afraid the mystery continues, then - all the db's tablespaces are
dictionary-managed.

Any more ideas, anyone?

Paul

-----Original Message-----
From: oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Mercadante, Thomas F
Sent: 15 September 2004 15:00
To: Oracle-L@Freelists. Org (E-mail)
Subject: RE: Relating actual object size to Storage parameters


I guess I left out the "locally managed" part!  That is what I meant, of
course!  :)

Tom Mercadante
Oracle Certified Professional


-----Original Message-----
From: Niall Litchfield [mailto:niall.litchfield@xxxxxxxxx]=20
Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 2004 9:58 AM
To: thomas.mercadante@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: Paul.Vincent@xxxxxxxxx; Oracle-L@Freelists. Org (E-mail)
Subject: Re: Relating actual object size to Storage parameters


Comments in line
On Wed, 15 Sep 2004 07:57:31 -0400, Mercadante, Thomas F
<thomas.mercadante@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Paul,
>=20
> Check the storage params on the tablespace.  Could be that the initial

> extent for the tbs is 512k.  I think this would trump the table=20
> storage param.

If only that were the case!=20

object storage takes precedence over the tablespace clause (which if you
think about it just defines a default value for new objects) for
traditional
tablespaces.

There is a rather important change though for locally managed
tablespaces
where the object clauses are [1] ignored. I'd hazard a guess then that
Paul
has a locally managed tablespace with uniform extent management and a
uniform size of 512k.

--=20
Niall Litchfield
Oracle DBA
http://www.niall.litchfield.dial.pipex.com

[1] Strictly they are not *ignored* at creation since the requested
initial
size for the object *determines* how many extents are initially
allocated.
The extents follow the tablespace policy though. So in Paul's case I
would
expect a new object with initial and next of  800k to get two extents on
creation each of 512k - requested more than 512k therefore need 2
extents.
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l

--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l

Other related posts: