Chris Hughes
ProgressTalk.com Sponsor
Hi
A shocking title I know but now I have your attention please let me explain....
I live (for the absolute most part) in 10.2B+ soon 11 on various OS's, with large files enabled.
I know prior to enablelargefiles and various other OS limitations 2GB was as much as we could go in a single file. But now we don't have that limitation...
So to make this simple I'm inventing a scenario, lets say the raw db data is 5GB, its stored on its own drive that is 50GB (no chance of running out of space). Its type 2 with 9 area's row per block sizes 1,2,4,8,16,32,64,128,256 all clustered to 512.
If I create a single fixed extent of 1GB on each and 1 variable now I use 9GB to hold to hold 5GB of data...
So why don't I / we / all just only use variable extents now?
Thanks for reading.
Chris.
A shocking title I know but now I have your attention please let me explain....
I live (for the absolute most part) in 10.2B+ soon 11 on various OS's, with large files enabled.
I know prior to enablelargefiles and various other OS limitations 2GB was as much as we could go in a single file. But now we don't have that limitation...
So to make this simple I'm inventing a scenario, lets say the raw db data is 5GB, its stored on its own drive that is 50GB (no chance of running out of space). Its type 2 with 9 area's row per block sizes 1,2,4,8,16,32,64,128,256 all clustered to 512.
If I create a single fixed extent of 1GB on each and 1 variable now I use 9GB to hold to hold 5GB of data...
So why don't I / we / all just only use variable extents now?
Thanks for reading.
Chris.
Last edited: