Re: alert log suppression

2002-12-16 Thread Connor McDonald
The obvious question being why you are coalescing tablespaces --- "Markham, Richard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Is it possible to suppress successful DDL within the > alter log? > For example, I have a cron job that coalesces 300+ > tablespaces > which creates a couple line entry for each.

RE: alert log suppression

2002-12-16 Thread Markham, Richard
Title: RE: alert log suppression ok.  They are LMT's with PCTINCREASE 0.  I'm running 8.1.7.4 and I believe that SMON requires PCTINCREASE > 0 to do routine coalescing.perhaps you have further to add to your post. -Original Message- From: Connor McDonald [

Re: alert log suppression

2002-12-16 Thread Igor Neyman
Title: RE: alert log suppression Richard,   If you are using UNIFORM extents (which is usually the best option), you don't need to do any coalescing on LMTs.   Igor Neyman, OCP DBA[EMAIL PROTECTED]      - Original Message - From: Markham, Richard To: Multiple recipien

RE: alert log suppression

2002-12-16 Thread Deshpande, Kirti
Title: RE: alert log suppression Coalescing LMTs is unnecessary !   - Kirti   -Original Message-From: Markham, Richard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 12:00 PMTo: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-LSubject: RE: alert log suppression ok.  They are LMT&#

RE: alert log suppression

2002-12-16 Thread Markham, Richard
ECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 1:30 PMTo: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-LSubject: Re: alert log suppression Richard,   If you are using UNIFORM extents (which is usually the best option), you don't need to do any coalescing on LMTs.   Igor Neyman, OCP DBA[EMAIL

RE: alert log suppression

2002-12-16 Thread Wong, Bing
Title: RE: alert log suppression If it is LMT, coalescing is ignored. -Original Message-From: Deshpande, Kirti [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 10:34 AMTo: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-LSubject: RE: alert log suppression Coalescing LMTs is

Re: alert log suppression

2002-12-16 Thread Igor Neyman
ictionary managed tablespaces.   Igor Neyman, OCP DBA[EMAIL PROTECTED]      - Original Message - From: Markham, Richard To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 2:09 PM Subject: RE: alert log suppression Thanks for the info Igor.  In

Re: alert log suppression

2002-12-16 Thread Arup Nanda
and NEXT_EXTENT; they should be same.   HTH.   Arup - Original Message - From: Markham, Richard To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 2:09 PM Subject: RE: alert log suppression Thanks for the info Igor.  In addition to this I am

RE: alert log suppression

2002-12-16 Thread Markham, Richard
recipients of list ORACLE-LSubject: Re: alert log suppression Richard,   I have here versions 8.1.5 and 9.2. Both show allocation type "UNIFORM" for LMTs with uniform extent size (except LM SYSTEM and UNDO tablespaces in 9.2 , for which "SYSTEM" allocation type is shown),

RE: alert log suppression

2002-12-17 Thread Connor McDonald
The EXTENT_MANAGEMENT column tells you if they are locally managed or not. If they are local, then the ALLOCATION_TYPE will be either UNIFORM, SYSTEM or USER. The latter means it was originally a dictionary managed tspace that has been converted to lmt. But in any event, the coalesce is just ext