data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/835f0/835f0183d68360e38201c0eea348393d05ddc0cf" alt="" |
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/fedd4/fedd46b5eddfc5d215c8fcb543c21c47cbcce0b1" alt="" |
Archives of the TeradataForum
Message Posted: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 @ 08:27:34 GMT
Subj: | | Re: Discrepancies in DBC.TABLESIZE ?? |
|
From: | | Dodgson, Mark |
I think you're right Ruth, in agreeing with Andy. The blocking differences that he's suggested certainly explain this 'phenomenon'.
Table_A and Table_B were not created at the same time, which means that Table_A (the first created) would undoubtedly have been subject
to update and maintenance. Our regular PM slots would have affected this table, along with various updates. Table_A was populated via
ARCMAIN, whereas Table_B was only a dictionary copy (same release).
I don't have the facility to run maintenance tasks direct against our tables, so can't run a defrag/packdisk direct. Then again, after
the feedback so far, I don't think I really need to. I was just curious as to why the discrepancy was apparent - I'm happy now that there's
a good explanation for it.
Thanks for all your feedback.
Cheers,
Mark
| |