嗨可以有人让我知道为什么我们为索引和数据创建了不同的表空间.
普遍认为,将索引和表保存在单独的表空间中可以提高性能.现在这被许多尊敬的专家认为是一个神话(见
this Ask Tom thread – search for “myth”),但仍然是一个常见的做法,因为老习惯死亡！
第三方编辑
从asktom提取：“Index Tablespace”从2001年的Oracle版本8.1.6的问题
>将索引保留在自己的表空间还是一个好主意吗？
这是否提高了性能,还是更多的恢复问题？
>答案是否从一个平台到另一个平台不同？
回覆的第一部分
Yes,no,maybe. The idea,born in the 1980s when systems were tiny and user counts were in the single digits,was that you separated indexes from data into separate tablespaces on different disks. In that fashion,you positioned the head of the disk in the index tablespace and the head of the disk in the data tablespace and that would be better then seeking 2 times on the same disk. Drives back then were really slow at seeking and typically measured in the 10's to 100's of megabytes (if you were lucky) Today,with logical volumes,raid,NN gigabyte (nn is rapidly becoming NNN gigabytes) drives,hundreds/thousands of concurrent users,thousands of tables,10's of thousands of indexes - this sort of "optimization" is sort of impossible. What you strive for today is to be able to manage things,to spread IO out evenly avoiding hot spots. Since I believe all things should be in locally managed tablespaces with UNIFORM extent sizes,I would say that yes,indexes would be in a different tablespace from the data but only because they are a different SIZE then the data. My table with 50 columns and an average row size of 4k might belong in a tablespace that has 5meg extents whereas the index on a single number column might belong in a tablespace with 512k or 1m extents. I tend to keep my indexes separate from the data but for the above sizing reason. The tablespaces frequently end up on the same exact mount points. You strive for even io across your disks and you may end up with indexes and data on the same devices.
