Another point of discussion - just what do you expect to gain by altering
the SYSTEM tablespace's storage params? It is not a high volume tablespace
- the O's part of I/O to this particular tablespace is very low. Altering
storage params here are just simply a waste of time - there is no benefit to
doing it. And if you are THAT anal in that you want all tablespaces to be
the same, then you have more immediate problems!!!
Tom Mercadante
Oracle Certified Professional
Oracle Certified Professional
-----Original Message-----Good point! Another war story...
From: Tim Gorman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, August 18, 2003 9:45 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Subject: Re: system tablespace at 50 pct_increase in 9i?
Some 6 years ago, during v7.3.3 timeframe, a DBA decided to modify INITIAL, NEXT, and PCTINCREASE of everything, including stuff in SYSTEM. Unfortunately, he chose first to do this in pre-PROD (to become PROD following week). Turns out he ran into a little-known bug (aren’t they all, at first?) whereby any ALTER TABLE to the table named SYS.BOOTSTRAP$ causes a single bit to be set in the segment header block. This single bit being set causes ORA-00600 on instance startup.
You guessed it: the night before go live, they had a junior DBA stop and restart the instance at 12:30am. Poor guy stayed up all night, I got there around 6:00am, we found the cause and convinced Oracle Support to dial in and BBED the problem into submission by 1:00pm. MetaLink didn’t exist in those days — we had access to MetaLink’s predecessor, called “WebIV”...
Don’t change the stuff in the SYSTEM tablespace, which includes the tablespace itself. Keep “foreign stuff” (i.e. not belonging to SYS, SYSTEM, MDSYS, ORDSYS, OUTLN, etc) out of it and just leave it alone.
on 8/18/03 4:59 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i thought you should leave the system table space to the defaults? Ive never touched System.
you really should change system to locally managed tablespaces?
>
> From: Tim Gorman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: 2003/08/17 Sun PM 11:19:23 EDT
> To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: system tablespace at 50 pct_increase in 9i?
>
> Better yet, use locally-managed SYSTEM tablespace and dispense with the
> issue altogether?
>
>
> on 8/17/03 5:39 PM, Ryan at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > any idea why oracle has the system tablespace using 50 pct_increase in 9i? I k
> > now it did that in the past, but why not set it to zero?
> >
> > Ryan
> >
>
>
>
>
Better yet, use locally-managed SYSTEM tablespace and dispense with the issue altogether?
on 8/17/03 5:39 PM, Ryan at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
any idea why oracle has the system tablespace using 50 pct_increase in 9i? I k now it did that in the past, but why not set it to zero?
Ryan
