Re: Snapshot last refresh date 1950 - 7.3.4 & 8.0.3 dbs

Can you do a execute dbms_snapshot.refresh('COGGREP.SSTEST1') from SQL*Plus?? If not what errors do you get??

Also have you tried a execute dbms_job.run(1) from SQL*Plus, if not does this work as well.

Bob

Leigh Satchell <satch_at_pipeline.com.au> wrote in message news:3886F262.3D53E955_at_pipeline.com.au...
> Here goes Bob,
>
> Eg:
> CREATE SNAPSHOT COGGREP.SSTEST1
> TABLESPACE USERS
> STORAGE ( MINEXTENTS 1 MAXEXTENTS UNLIMITED)
> REFRESH COMPLETE
> START WITH sysdate
> NEXT sysdate + 1
> AS
> SELECT * from dual;
>
> Dbs are on Solaris 2.6.
> Errors in alert.log are as follows:
> ORA-12012: error on auto execute of job 1
> ORA-12005: may not schedule automatic refresh for times in the past
> Mon Jan 17 22:32:34 2000
> Mon Jan 17 22:32:34 2000
> *** SESSION ID:(7.31) 2000.01.17.22.32.34.000
>
>
> Bob Bain wrote:
>
> > Whoa, we've been using snapshots udner 7.3.3 and 7.3.4 for sometime and
have
> > not come across that problem, loads of them have a sysdate + 1 as the
next
> > refresh date.
> >
> > How did you create your snapshot (a bit of sample code might be helpful)
as
> > this is the only thing that I can think of that is going wrong.
> >
> > On our setup if a snapshot fails (i.e. the job cannot be run for 16
> > iterations) then ORACLE sets the next date to 01-JAN-4000 and the job is
> > marked as broken! Check FAILURES and BROKEN columns in user_jobs for the
> > jobs that run your snapshots, it might be that ORACLE is marking them as
> > broken and setting the next date to 01-JAN-1950 for some reason.
> >
> > Bob
> >
> > Leigh Satchell <satch_at_pipeline.com.au> wrote in message
> > news:3886BECC.1E5B08FE_at_pipeline.com.au...
> > > Recently had a need to create my first snapshots in dbs of the above
> > > versions.
> > > When they next refreshed the last refresh date reverted to 1st Jan
1950.
> > > Can someone easily tell me if this is a Y2K issue with these versions
> > > and that I need 8.0.5.x or is the use of sysdate + 1 as a 'NEXT' value
> > > not reliable. I would have thought the former......
> > >
> > > Ta,
> > > Leigh
> > > ************************
> > > lsatchell_at_geelongcity.vic.gov.au
> > > satch_at_pipeline.com.au
> > >
>
Received on Thu Jan 20 2000 - 05:45:26 CST