If you run OPS and specify order, it works like no cache.
My question to you: "Why cripple OPS and your business performance by having this requirement ?" Spending a few bucks to get rid of this dependency will improve the performance, until you run in to the next problem ;-) Anjo. On Wednesday 04 September 2002 00:00, you wrote: > I'm managing an OPS configuration (4x HP 9000/N, HP-UX 11/64 , RDBMS > 8.1.7.1) > and I'm having an application dependency on a temporal order of sequence > numbers. > With OPS that becomes a problem because each node caches a set of sequence > numbers > (20 by default). Oracle has an option, specifically for that situation, > namely "ORDER". > My question is whether ORDER is the same thing as NOCACHE and whether it is > possible > to have a NOCACHE sequence which will return numbers in an incorrect order > (larger number > before the smaller one). > Please, o OPS gods and godesses, help me out and I'll sacrifice you a beer > when I see you. > Mladen Gogala -- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com -- Author: Anjo Kolk INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fat City Network Services -- (858) 538-5051 FAX: (858) 538-5051 San Diego, California -- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists -------------------------------------------------------------------- To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).
