Oracle datafile size in Windows

EP

unread,

Sep 4, 2002, 4:36:42 PM9/4/02

to

Hi,

Oracle 8.1.7 database - size ca. 100 GB
Windows 2000 Advanced Server - NTFS

What is the better solution:
1. few large datafiles
2. numerous relatively small datafiles (max. 2 GB)

In case of the first solution - how do you think- what is the "safe" size of
such large datafile in Windows ?

TIA
EP

Daniel Morgan

unread,

Sep 4, 2002, 5:57:24 PM9/4/02

to

EP wrote:

How large do you think you can make files under 32 bit Windows?

Daniel Morgan

EP

unread,

Sep 4, 2002, 6:32:12 PM9/4/02

to

> How large do you think you can make files under 32 bit Windows?
>
> Daniel Morgan

Up to the volume size - at least in NTFS.

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/home/using/productdoc/en/default.asp?url=
/WINDOWSXP/home/using/productdoc/en/choosing_between_NTFS_FAT_and_FAT32.asp

Regards
EP

James Williams

unread,

Sep 4, 2002, 9:59:45 PM9/4/02

to

On Wed, 4 Sep 2002 22:36:42 +0200, "EP" <e...@plusnet.pl> wrote:

There were some major issues with files greater than 4 gig in NT 4.0

I personally would not create a datafile greater than 4 gig on
Windows.

Richard Foote

unread,

Sep 5, 2002, 1:03:40 AM9/5/02

to

Hi EP,

I personally would recommend option 2 with a 100 GBish database.

This will require 50ish data files which is not particularly excessive. It
will also give you more flexibility with online backup strategies and less
issues with restore and recovery times if such a fateful day were to arrive.

Cheers

Richard
"EP" <e...@plusnet.pl> wrote in message news:al5qmj$k2o$1...@news2.tpi.pl...

Ton.van.V...@hccnet.nl

unread,

Sep 5, 2002, 4:44:54 AM9/5/02

to

What is the max size of a Oracle data file on windows NT?

Peter van Rijn

unread,

Sep 5, 2002, 7:15:39 AM9/5/02

to

Ton,

Please read Note 62427.1 on Metalink.

Peter

<Ton.van.V...@hccnet.nl> schreef in bericht
news:3d77195c...@news.hccnet.nl...

Niall Litchfield

unread,

Sep 5, 2002, 7:49:56 AM9/5/02

to

See Richard's excellent note suggesting option 2 and justifying it in terms
of B & R. How many disks do you have? If it is one raid 5 array the point is
probably somewhat moot. You will in any case run into a file size limitation
caused not by any NT limitation but by the fact that an oracle datafile can
only have so many blocks.

I'd also suggest that you don't think of the db as 100gb of data but as
comprised of tables of varying sizes. You will want to create a range of
locally managed tablespaces with different uniform sizes. 1 with an extent
size of say 64k for tables of say less than 1m., one with an extent size of
say 1m for tables less than say 100m and so on.

So for two different reasons I'd suggest option 2, backup and recovery and
sensible division of db objects by size.

The final reason for multiple datafiles (to spread IO) depends entirely on
how many disks you have which you don't tell us, but in general small
datafiles spread across multiple disks will give better performance than
large datafiles on single disks.

--
Niall Litchfield
Oracle DBA
Audit Commission UK
*****************************************
Please include version and platform
and SQL where applicable
It makes life easier and increases the
likelihood of a good answer
******************************************

"EP" <e...@plusnet.pl> wrote in message news:al5qmj$k2o$1...@news2.tpi.pl...