Re: Which RBS is my Update using ?

Richard Foote wrote:

> Hi Daniel,
>
> I have a number of talents (such as rolling my tongue long ways, holding my
> nose and blowing bubbles out of my eyes and recognising any David Bowie song
> from a 1 second snippet) but obviously mind reading isn't one of them.
>
> I hate it when I try and fail.
>
> I apologise.
>
> Richard
> "Daniel Morgan" <dmorgan_at_exesolutions.com> wrote in message
> news:3D908D08.5AF353CC_at_exesolutions.com...
> > Richard Foote wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Brian,
> > >
> > > But the use of OPTIMAL is the issue.
> > >
> > > Daniel's methodology is such that he prefers *not* to use the SET
> > > TRANSACTION USE ROLLBACK SEGMENT large (for the reasons he's stated) and
> > > *not* to use OPTIMAL (for the potential performance issues of extents
> being
> > > deallocated during a transaction).
> > >
> > > Paul's methodology is such that he also does *not* want to use OPTIMAL
> > > because of the possible performance issues but *does* prefer to use SET
> > > TRANSACTION USE ROLLBACK SEGMENT large for his few but pricey large
> > > transactions such that the majority of his ordinary small transactions
> can
> > > use smaller, non optimal constrained rollback segments.
> > >
> > > Note there's another current thread 'Optimal size for rollback' where
> the
> > > pros and cons of optimal are being debated.
> > >
> > > My methodology is that it depends so I can just sit back and watch the
> > > battle unfold ;)
> > >
> > > Cheers
> > >
> > > Richard
> > > "Brian Peasland" <oracle_dba_at_peasland.com> wrote in message
> > > news:3D9061BE.B41C13FB_at_peasland.com...
> > > > > Daniel,
> > > > >
> > > > > Why should they all be 1 gig on a read-only database?
> > > > >
> > > > > Paul
> > > >
> > > > You don't define them *all* to be 1-GB. You only define them to be
> able
> > > > to *extend* to 1-GB. Then, make sure you set OPTIMAL so that the one
> > > > rollback segment that does extend will shrink back to a smaller size.
> > > > This way, you don't have to set your transaction to use one particular
> > > > rollback segment. No matter which one it grabs, it has the capability
> to
> > > > expand any of the rollback segments to a large enough size.
> > > >
> > > > HTH,
> > > > Brian
> >
> > Actually I have never said anything about OPTIMAL one way or the other.
> And I
> > haven't said not to use SET TRANSACTION either. What I have said is that
> as
> > insurance ... all RBS should be sized to handle the largest transaction so
> that
> > if for any reason BIG_ROLL is not available the system doesn't crash and
> burn.
> >
> > Daniel Morgan
> >

No offense taken. It is all with good humor.

Daniel Morgan Received on Wed Sep 25 2002 - 11:26:12 CDT