Re: Shutdown problem

Throwing in my two cents, I've seen at least two threads on Oracle Metals in which Oracle's Reem Adranly has come out against unnecessary shutdown aborts - in one of the threads, she criticized the practice of normally doing an abort-startup-shutdown as, "... too harsh ...".

Shutdown abort was known to cause corruption in some revs of 6 and 7.0. I personally avoid the practice except in extremis.

Steve

Me_at_this.com wrote in message <358f96b4.1308214_at_news.compuserve.com>...
>Following this thread, many people seem to complain of "hanging" when
>using shutdown immediate. What you must all realize is with a
>shutdown immediate, any transaction currently active in the database
>will be terminated and its work will be ROLLED BACK. This means if
>a transaction has been updating constantly for 30 minutes without
>performing a commit, it is going to take approximately 30 minutes to
>rollback the changes. If a shutdown abort is done, the database comes
>down immediately (to the delight of many a dba), but the difference is
>the rollback is deferred until the next startup.
>
>Pre-7.3, that meant the startup could take about 30 minutes in the
>above mentioned scenario. With 7.3 and beyond, there is a feature
>enabled by default called deferred transaction rollback, where either
>the first transaction to touch a block after startup (or smon when it
>is posted) will rollback any non-active uncommited transactions left
>in the transaction list in the block. This may slow down some
>transactions after startup. To see if this is happening, select
>status from dba_rollback_segs, any status of "PARTIAL ONLINE" (I
>think, I know PARTIAL is part of it), tells you some cleanup is going
>on. SMON will not clean all of the blocks up at once, it will do a
>predetermined amount (20-50), finish those, and then do another set
>the next time it posts.
>
>HTH,
>
>Frank
>
>
>On Tue, 23 Jun 1998 05:26:36 GMT, shreterh_at_my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
>>Confession: I'm doing the same thing as the original author (shutdown
abort /
>>startup / shutdown). I changed it one day to "immediate" and was
immediately
>>rewarded with a hung backup and angry sys admin/helpline.
>>
>>Is there an alternative? Look for running processes against Oracle
>>(LOCAL=NO; LOCAL=YES) and kill them, letting Oracle groom itself
afterward?
>>What can we do between ABORT and IMMEDIATE that gets the job done?
>>
>>Appreciate in advance any suggestions. - Hilary Shreter.
>>
>>In article <6mlq97$h93$1_at_hdxf08.telecom.ptt.nl>,
>> Alfons Riesebeek <A.Riesebeek_at_wxs.nl> wrote:
>>>
>>> You should do a shutdown immediate. In this way Oracle rolls back
>>> actions of processes with are still running before killing them.
>>>
>>> In most cases this works fine. Never do a shutdown abort !!
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Alfons Riesebeek
>>>
>>> Gilberto Casiraghi <edipi_at_candy.it> schrijfbewerkingen: > Hello all !
>>...
>>> > shutdown hanging (it seems incredible but it's true).
>>> > To avoid this situation I change the shutdown script in this way:
>>> > alter system checkpoint
>>> > shutdown abort
>>> > startup
>>> > shutdown
>>> > So the db will be ALWAYS closed and with the checkpoint I don't
>>> > lose any data (I hope!).
>>> > What do you think about it ? Is there a better way ? (I want to be
SURE
>>> > the shutdown CLOSE the db, so the backup procedure can end rightly).
>>> > Any suggestion it will be appreciated.
>>> >
>>> > Thanks in advanced.
>>> > Gilberto Casiraghi.
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
>>http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
>
Received on Tue Jun 30 1998 - 07:36:52 CDT