Re: Non default NOCACHE sequence clause

From: Ben Ryan <benryan_at_my-deja.com>
Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1999 16:45:07 GMT
Message-ID: <82m1ug$dbq$1@nnrp1.deja.com>

In article <82f6a2022c4_at_enews4.newsguy.com>, "Andre Whittick Nasser" <awnasser_at_openlink.com.br> wrote:
> I had a problem defining a sequence in Oracle8. Even though I did not
> specify a CACHE clause, Oracle returned an error saying that there was
a
> problem with the cache value. It only worked when I explicitly forced
the
> NOCACHE clause. Shouldn't NOCACHE be the default ? Does anybody know
if it's
> a reported bug ?

As the Oracle Concepts Manual says, the sequence generator is useful to generate and return sequential numbers without the overhead of disk I/O or ...

NOCACHE means ALWAYS get the next number in the sequence from a data dictionary table in the system tablespace (i.e. potential disk I/O).

So, no, NOCACHE should not be the default.

Sounds like you do not have enough room in memory to store any more sequence numbers. If you look up the Oracle error in the manual or using the Unix utility 'oerr' it will tell you if this is indeed the problem.

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy. Received on Wed Dec 08 1999 - 10:45:07 CST