Re: delayed block cleanout

2001-02-27 Thread nlzanen1


Hi,


You are right bouncing the database won't do the trick. The next access to
the block will do the cleanout no matter if the database has gone down in
between.


Jack


   

Russell Brooks 

russell.brooks@amctechn   To: Multiple recipients of list 
ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
ology.com cc: 

Sent by:   Subject: delayed block cleanout 

[EMAIL PROTECTED]   

   

   

27-02-2001 15:40   

Please respond to  

ORACLE-L   

   

   




Hi,
  In order to avoid ORA-1555s due to delayed block cleanout during a
particular conversion, we are running full table scans before the
conversion.  Someone has asked if bouncing the system prior to the
conversion, which would be much faster, would suffice.  I think the
rollback
segment entries are already flagged as commited, and the header of the data
blocks would still contain the pointer to the RBS.  Even if you bounce the
system, I think you still get to wait until the next access of the block.
Does anyone else have an opinion?

Cheers,
Russ Brooks
--
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
--
Author: Russell Brooks
  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).




=
De informatie verzonden in dit e-mailbericht is vertrouwelijk en is
uitsluitend bestemd voor de geadresseerde. Openbaarmaking,
vermenigvuldiging, verspreiding en/of verstrekking van deze informatie aan
derden is, behoudens voorafgaande schriftelijke toestemming van Ernst 
Young, niet toegestaan. Ernst  Young staat niet in voor de juiste en
volledige overbrenging van de inhoud van een verzonden e-mailbericht, noch
voor tijdige ontvangst daarvan. Ernst  Young kan niet garanderen dat een
verzonden e-mailbericht vrij is van virussen, noch dat e-mailberichten
worden overgebracht zonder inbreuk of tussenkomst van onbevoegde derden.

Indien bovenstaand e-mailbericht niet aan u is gericht, verzoeken wij u
vriendelijk doch dringend het e-mailbericht te retourneren aan de verzender
en het origineel en eventuele kopien te verwijderen en te vernietigen.

Ernst  Young hanteert bij de uitoefening van haar werkzaamheden algemene
voorwaarden, waarin een beperking van aansprakelijkheid is opgenomen. De
algemene voorwaarden worden u op verzoek kosteloos toegezonden.
=
The information contained in this communication is confidential and is
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is
addressed. You should not copy, disclose or distribute this communication
without the authority of Ernst  Young. Ernst  Young is neither liable for
the proper and complete transmission of the information contained in this
communication nor for any delay in its receipt. Ernst  Young does not
guarantee that the integrity of this communication has been maintained nor
that the communication is free of viruses, interceptions or interference.

If you are not the intended recipient of this communication please return
the communication to the sender and delete and destroy all copies.

In carrying out its engagements, Ernst  Young 

RE: delayed block cleanout

2001-02-27 Thread Steve Adams

Hi Russ,

Yes, a bounce will not achieve anything, and neither will a full table scan if
it is done in parallel or if 'delayed_logging_block_cleanouts' is TRUE (which is
the default at 7.3 and 8.0).

@   Regards,
@   Steve Adams
@   http://www.ixora.com.au/
@   http://www.christianity.net.au/


-Original Message-
Sent: Wednesday, 28 February 2001 0:41
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L


Hi,
  In order to avoid ORA-1555s due to delayed block cleanout during a
particular conversion, we are running full table scans before the
conversion.  Someone has asked if bouncing the system prior to the
conversion, which would be much faster, would suffice.  I think the rollback
segment entries are already flagged as commited, and the header of the data
blocks would still contain the pointer to the RBS.  Even if you bounce the
system, I think you still get to wait until the next access of the block.
Does anyone else have an opinion?

Cheers,
Russ Brooks

-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
-- 
Author: Steve Adams
  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).