Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid
HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US
 

Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.server -> Re: COMPATIBLE parameter not being read...why?

Re: COMPATIBLE parameter not being read...why?

From: AleX <korrozia_at_my-deja.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1999 22:07:06 GMT
Message-ID: <7oss64$tfj$1@nnrp1.deja.com>


I've run into the situations when 'compatible' was set to 8.0.4 and Oracle would claim that it's not high enough (it wanted 8.0.4.0.0). Go figure.

In article <KFjs3.322$sM4.14361_at_dfiatx1-snr1.gtei.net>,   "Christopher Allen" <progplusSPAMBEGONE_at_gte.net> wrote:
> I was editing the right init.ora file for the instance I was using,
but your
> question got me to thinking, because the database has multipe
instances.
> Checking the UNIX environment, I determined that a different instance
was
> specified in the ORACLE_SID environment variable.
>
> So I edited the init.ora file for that instance, and the problem went
away.
> Of course, a new one appeared. The problem I'm running into is
rollback
> segments that are failing to extend (ORA-01562: failed to extend
rollback
> segment number 2; ORA-01628: max # extents (121) reached for rollabck
> segment). When I try to increase the number of extents the rollback
segment
> can use, I get the following error msesage:
> ORA-01545: rollback segment 'RBS_NAME_HERE' specified not available
>
> The Oracle documentation for this error message is useless. It states
four
> cases in which the message can appear: the first two are when one is
trying
> to bring an offline RBS online, and the other two are when one is
trying to
> drop a RBS. Neither of these is the case here.
>
> If you have any thoughts about what could be causing this, I'd sure
like to
> hear about it.
>
> Thanks for your assistance,
> Christopher
>
> Thomas Kyte <tkyte_at_us.oracle.com> wrote in message
> news:37b6719b.4657116_at_newshost.us.oracle.com...
> > A copy of this was sent to "Christopher Allen"
> <progplusSPAMBEGONE_at_gte.net>
> > (if that email address didn't require changing)
> > On Wed, 11 Aug 1999 01:23:56 GMT, you wrote:
> >
> > >I changed the COMPATIBLE string in intiORCL.ora to 7.3.4.0.1 (the
version
> > >that shows when you log in with SQL*Plus), bounced the database,
and the
> > >COMPATIBLE parameter still isn't "taking".
> > >
> > >As noted in another message in this thread, when I go into SVRMGRL
and
> enter
> > >the command "show parameter compatible", the two entries that
display
> > >("compatible" and "compatible_no_recovery"), both have blank
values.
> > >
> > >The check-constraint example I gave was accurate but silly. Far
more
> > >importantly, I'm not able to do necessary work with the database.
For
> > >instance, the rocket scientist who set this database up gave the
USERS
> > >datafile a size of 1MB. I want to expand this, but cannot, because
the
> > >Storage Manager tells me my Compatible parameter is not sufficient.
> > >
> > >Any thoughts what could be causing this behavior?
> > >
> > >Thanks.
> >
> >
> > are you sure you are updating the correct init file?
> >
> > how about changing some other parameter in this file and verifying
that it
> takes
> > (eg: change the db_block_buffers and see if the sga size changes on
> startup).
> >
> > by default, the pfile for oracle will be
> >
> > $ORACLE_HOME/dbs/init$ORACLE_SID.ora
> >
> > I've changed my compatible over and over on 7.3.4 on solaris and
have not
> been
> > able to reproduce.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >Sybrand Bakker <postmaster_at_sybrandb.demon.nl> wrote in message
> > >news:934305532.14577.0.pluto.d4ee154e_at_news.demon.nl...
> > >> Could it be your string is too short
> > >> 7.3.4.0
> > >> against
> > >> 7.3.0.0.0
> > >> Sometimes Oracle can be very stupid.
> > >> I'm not sure why you want to create a check(c1 is not null)
constraint
> on
> > >a
> > >> column, which is already mandatory.
> > >> Just asking...
> > >>
> > >> Hth,
> > >>
> > >> Sybrand Bakker, Oracle DBA
> > >>
> > >> Christopher Allen <progplusSPAMBEGONE_at_gte.net> wrote in message
> > >> news:zIYr3.242$P36.11560_at_dfiatx1-snr1.gtei.net...
> > >> > I'm trying to perform a simple DDL operation that my Solaris
Oracle
> > >> > 7.3.4.0.1 server is refusing to run, citing a problem with its
> > >COMPATIBLE
> > >> > parameter. The thing is: its COMPATIBLE parameter is actually
fine.
> > >> >
> > >> > The problem appears when I run this command:
> > >> > CREATE TABLE T2
> > >> >
> > >> > C1 NUMBER NOT NULL,
> > >> > C2 VARCHAR2(30) NULL,
> > >> > C3 DATE NULL,
> > >> > CHECK (C1 IS NOT NULL)
> > >> > )
> > >> > PCTFREE 10
> > >> > PCTUSED 40
> > >> > INITRANS 1
> > >> > MAXTRANS 255
> > >> > STORAGE (
> > >> > INITIAL 1024K
> > >> > NEXT 1024K
> > >> > MINEXTENTS 1
> > >> > MAXEXTENTS 2147483645
> > >> > PCTINCREASE 1)
> > >> > ;
> > >> >
> > >> > The response is:
> > >> > CHECK (C1 IS NOT NULL)
> > >> > *
> > >> > ERROR at line 5:
> > >> > ORA-00406: COMPATIBLE parameter needs to be 7.3.0.0.0 or
greater
> > >> >
> > >> > The COMPATIBLE parameter *is* greater than 7.3.0.0.0. Here is
the
> line
> > >> from
> > >> > the initORCL.ORA file:
> > >> > compatible = 7.3.4.0
> > >> >
> > >> > I would appreciate ANY ideas about what could be causing this
> problem.
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > See http://govt.us.oracle.com/~tkyte/ for my columns 'Digging-in to
> Oracle8i'...
> > Current article is "Part I of V, Autonomous Transactions" updated
June
> 21'st
> >
> > Thomas Kyte tkyte_at_us.oracle.com
> > Oracle Service Industries Reston, VA USA
> >
> > Opinions are mine and do not necessarily reflect those of Oracle
> Corporation
>
>

--

                 Alex Shterenberg

"I hate people. I think they should suffer as much as  possible, and therefore I'm into those old communist

         dictatorships." - Euronymous, Mayhem

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't. Received on Wed Aug 11 1999 - 17:07:06 CDT

Original text of this message

HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US