Re: create index and rollback segs?

I'm still thinking about the massive use of rollback, which shouldn't happen.

Bear in mind though that 'create index' starts with an implicit commit, which immediately undoes the effect of your 'set transaction'.

Is this problem totally repeatable ?
Do you have the TEMP segment set up as
a temporary segment - should be irrelevant, but you never can tell.

--

Jonathan Lewis
Yet another Oracle-related web site: http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk

Lothar Armbüster wrote in message
<1352.11T1532T11713635_at_rheingau.netsurf.de>...
>Vrajesh Patel wrote at 07-Dez-99 18:57:49
>on the subject Re: create index and rollback segs?:
>
>>By default,
>> Maximum no. of extents are 121. Increase that size to all RBS by some
max.
>>no, supported by your system.
>
>Well, I know this. What puzzles me is the fact that a create index needs
>rollback segments. Since there is nothing to rollback after a create
>index. The index creation ran alone whithout any parallel load on the
>server so there isn't any need for rollback segs to get consistent view of
>data either.
>The other amazing thing is that RB9 gets full while I told the transaction
>to use RB_BIG (which can grow to 1GB so should be enough).
Received on Wed Dec 08 1999 - 13:44:42 CST