Well.....
I'll
agree with you only on the basis that shutdown immediate sometimes hangs and in
those cases it is quicker to do the abort/start/shut normal combination.
However, based on a quick review of my logs from last night (cold
backup), I see the shutdown immediate took about 12 seconds. The
following startup (which needed no recovery) took about a
minute.
Had I
used the shut abort technique, I expect I would have seen, let's say 5
seconds for the shut abort, 60 seconds or so for the startup restricted, then
about 12 seconds for the shutdown normal.
Hmmm. Doesn't seem so cut and dried to me. I think I'll keep
using my shutdown script that tries shutdown immediate and only does the abort,
etc. if immediate takes too long. At this site, the shutdown immediate
only seems to fail about once a month. I can live with that unless someone
comes up with a more compelling reason why the shutdown abort is better than a
shutdown immediate. So far, all I've seen is the argument that shutdown
abort is not evil -- I'm not one who thinks it is evil, I'm just not convinced
that it is somehow better.
Kevin Kennedy
First Point Energy Corporation
-----Original Message-----
From: Gesler, Rich [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2002 11:14 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Subject: RE: shutdown abort / startup restrict / shutdown vs. shutdown immI don't necessarily agree that shutdown immediate is quicker. If you force a checkpoint prior to the shutdown abort the subsequent crash recovery upon startup is usually pretty fast. Parallel recovery could be a factor as well.- Rich-----Original Message-----
From: kkennedy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2002 1:14 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Subject: RE: shutdown abort / startup restrict / shutdown vs. shutdown immediaFor openers, shutdown immediate is generally quicker than the combination of shutdown-abort/startup-restrict/shutdown-normal. It is also gentler. Consider the analogy of shutting down a Windows desktop computer. Is it preferable to do a standard software shutdown (and maybe tell Windows that you really want to end that hung process) or is it preferable to yank the plug out of the wall then plug it back in again, start up the machine, then shut it down gracefully? I always try to shut Windows down gracefully and only pull the plug when the damn thing is too stupid or brain dead to figure out what shutdown means. I do the same with Oracle.Kevin Kennedy
First Point Energy Corporation-----Original Message-----
From: Jacques Kilchoer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, July 22, 2002 7:53 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Subject: shutdown abort / startup restrict / shutdown vs. shutdown immedia> -----Original Message-----
> From: April Wells [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> The solutions (the ones that I got) aren't good ones.
>
> Shutdown abort/startup restricted/ shutdown immediate... (a 'VALID
> solution'???)This might be a naive question, but why is
-> shutdown immediate
better than
-> shutdown abort / startup restrict / shutdown normal ?(That is assuming of course that no user / job will try to sneak in after you do the startup restrict)
