| dba |
Posted: Apr 09, 2007 03:05:29 PM |
Total Post: 6
Joined: Apr, 2007
|
Hi Jayanth,
Is it true that locally managed tablespace has not fragmentation issue.
When we had dictionary managed tablespace, there was always a need to reorg.
thanks in advance
|
|
|
 Ratnaker |
| Posted: Apr 26, 2007 04:05:17 AM |  |
|
Total Post: 138
Joined: Apr, 2007
|
Hi jayant,
You are correct
Ratnaker
|
|
|
|
|
| Avi |
| Posted: Apr 27, 2007 01:15:15 AM | |
|
Total Post: 7
Joined: Apr, 2007
|
locally managed giv more performance than dictionary cos they use bitmap indexes but dictionary uses binary indexes. BITMAP INDEXES CAN BE USED FR HEAVY DATA AND IT SAVES UR SPACE ALSO
|
|
|
|
|
| dipali |
| Posted: Apr 30, 2007 07:02:25 AM | |
|
Total Post: 31
Joined: Dec, 2006
|
Hi Avi,
Locally manage and dictionary manage : These two are the options provieded by oracle for space management at tablespace level na?
And as per my understating, in case of locally managed tablespace, the bitmap within a tablespace is used to keep track of all extent information of that tablespace. Right?
Dear bitmap and bitmap indexes are different things.
In case of dictionary managed tablespace, the table in data dictionary is used to manage extent information in that tablespace.. binary indexes does not come into picture at anywhere here..
Reffer the site..
http://download-west.oracle.com/docs/cd/B19306_01/server.102/b14231/tspaces.htm#i1013496
Regards..
Dipali
|
|
|
|
|
| Time Zone: EDT |
Send this thread to your friend |
