Hello everybody thank for your answers,
the size I'm talking about is summing up real sizes of archivelogs files, and I had each configuration of redo logs for one week, and the first one was for many months.
There was not any change on database objects and the database is small, the summing up real sizes of datafiles is 13G.
I think It not should be happennig, because the archive generation shouldn't be dependent on redolog size. But in this case yes (Could be an Oracle 9i bug?) .
Regards
Mauricio Vélez
Tanel Poder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Is your system overloaded e.g. there is a continuous queue of transactions waiting?In that case, with bigger redologs, full checkpoints happen less frequently, allowing database to work faster, thus generating more redo.But, othervise, the archive generation shouldn't be dependent on redolog size.How are you measuring your archive size, just counting number of files/entries from v$archived_log or summing up real sizes of archivelogs? (´these may differ noticeably, especially when frequent manual logswitches occur or archive_lag_target is set).Tanel.----- Original Message -----From: Mauricio VélezSent: Wednesday, January 07, 2004 10:49 PMSubject: Difference on ArchiveLog (I'm rewriting the question)Hello Everybody
I’m rewriting the question,
Some days ago the database I work on had 3 logfiles that sized 100M and the database was generating 4G of archive daily.
I changed the size to 20M and the database began to generate 2G of archive daily, then I changed to 50M and It began to generate 3G of archive daily.
I think I’ts not logical that archive size change.
The database I'm working on is oracle 9i and I'is on Windows NT.
Regards
Mauricio Vélez
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes
