Larry,
 
Agreed!  User logging also complicates database capacity management due
to the need to refresh logging cycles afterward - and on large
databases, those changes can take hours!
 
Lee Gunter      503-375-4498        [log in to unmask]
HMO Oregon      503-375-4401  fax
==========================================================
The opinions expressed, here, are mine and mine alone, and do not
necessarily reflect those of my employer.
 
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: DB Capacity Management
Author:  Larry Boyd <[log in to unmask]> at ~INTERNET
Date:    3/8/96 8:19 AM
 
 
Ron Burnett <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> I'm somewhat amused at all the difficulties people seem
> to be experiencing with DB capacity management, and DBX.
> I guess we aren't quite as big a shop as most (we have about
> 130 or so data bases, and the largest set among them is only
> about 3 million entries (roughly 2.5 million sectors)).
Actually, the size and number of the databases is not why DDX is
used.  It's more the size of your "window" to accomplish capacity
management.
 
If your window is too small (many shops do not have windows but maybe
once a month or quarter), then dynamic expansion is the only way to
go.  This was the purpose of DDX (and the new coming soon MDX).
 
When you have the time to manage your DBs as Ron has, then full
management with reorgs and such is the way it *should* be done.
However, with more and more 24x7 shops, you may not be able to afford
the down time to do this on an regular basis.
 
> So why use a sledge-hammer to chase a fly?
Think of it more like using regular unleaded gas for you race car
until you can get to the pits and fill up with the super-duper high
octane unleaded gas.
 
 
Larry Boyd    <[log in to unmask]>
"Each problem solved creates the opportunity to solve the next problem
          that the last solution created." - Richard Pascale
(These opinions are my own and not those of Hewlett-Packard.)