Re: Issues with Triggers in an Oracle RAC

From: Hemant K Chitale <>
Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2008 23:11:16 +0800
Message-Id: <>

Seems to be F.U.D .

Many purists prefer to avoid triggers altogether -- or minimise the use of triggers.
RAC performance issues come from non-scalable contention which is aggravated when across instances.

So your DBAs have put 2 and 2 together and come up with 4.

Two different issues together make their argument sound stronger !

Yes, FOR EACH ROW triggers firing concurrently across multiple instances may introduce contention --- but this could also be controlled by application and data partitioning (the same trigger for the same group of rows [blocks] doesn't get fired concurrently from two instances).

If they already do have trigger-based "limited" auditing, what are the additional
triggers that you are contemplating ?

Hemant K Chitale

At 08:37 PM Wednesday, you wrote:
>I've been having a conversation where I work about using triggers in
>our application environment. The DBAs here say that triggers are
>not appropriate in an Oracle RAC. Specifically they tell me:
>Triggers in a RAC environment have been known to cause library cache
>lock waits (in RAC because of the global cache and global
>coordination that occurs, this wait event gets more pronounced - lib
>cache concurrency). This was one of the main reasons we didn't do
>fast refreshes of snapshots for the heavily used tables. Currently
>we also have limited auditing turned on and it is trigger based and
>wouldn't want to open the flood-gates for trigger based solutions -
>primarily for performance reasons
>Needless to say I'm confused as I've used simple audit triggers to
>populate change user IDs and timestamps in rows for years without
>issue. I understand that if there is complicated trigger logic
>there may be problems, but for calculating audit columns I can't see
>it being an issue. Anyone else have a policy that doesn't allow
>triggers in RAC environments?
>We are on Oracle Database 10g Enterprise Edition Release - Prod.
>Rumpi Gravenstein

Received on Wed Apr 09 2008 - 10:11:16 CDT

Original text of this message