Re: Newbie question re refreshing Materialized Views

> As TRUNCATE is DDL, not DML,. two 'implied' commits occur, once before
> the truncate does the dirty deed, and once after. As such, there
> isn't any way to 'lock' this

Ah. Makes sense.

I need to do some reading up on why truncate works like that. Just for my own edification, I mean. I'm not doubting you, but it doesn't seem like a DDL type operation to me. Depends on how it's implemented I guess.

> message. In 10g the data is deleted (DML, no commit, implied or
> otherwise) so the behaviour you expect (returning a read-consistent
> image from the time before the refresh began) would occur.

Cool. I'm constrained by a 3rd party vendor (well: head office of our company) with the 9i thing; I've been campaigning for them to get their heads out of their arses and support 10g, but that's still in the workings. I will campaign some more.

> Possibly that explains the situation.

Yes it does!

> David Fitzjarrell

Cheers David.

So it seems to me, to get reliable results from these things, I kinda have to roll-my-own "refresh" routine (possibly along the lines of what Gints touched on earlier). That's a bit of a pain in the butt, but I guess it means I get to learn some more. Which is always good. If not always convenient ;-)

Thanks again.

-- 
Adam