DBAsupport.com Forums - Powered by vBulletin
Results 1 to 3 of 3
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    in my database, i only have around 50 tables.
    do you think it is a good idea to setup 50 tablespace and
    put each table in one tablespace?
    guru is on the way!!!!

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
    Okay, pesonally and of the cuff, I'd say I wouldn't do it. Fair enough you'll reduce fragmentation in each tablespace, since your extent size for each table should be uniform. BUT..you can do that with a Locally Managed Tablespaces.

    Also, you might be doing it to reduce I/O on each drive, but to get that benefit, you'd need to put each tablespace on an indivudual drive, 50 drives, and you were looking to reduce your Single point of failure you'd need 100 drives.

    If your tablspaces are one the SAME drives, your not saving anything, you'll just increase your admin tasks. Minimization of you tablespace, grouping the same size tables and their usages together.


  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    I agree. It's a fine line between keeping your I/O distributed and keeping your admin duties in the realm of the sane. Besides, a lot depends on how many file systems you have and how many I/O controllers you have. If you have 1 filesystem, you can break it up any way you want and you will get very similar performance because your data can only move as fast as your physical disk.
    Jeff Hunter
    Get Firefox!
    "I pledge to stop eating sharks fin soup and will not do so under any circumstances."

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Click Here to Expand Forum to Full Width

We have made updates to our Privacy Policy to reflect the implementation of the General Data Protection Regulation.