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: Transaction without redolog

Re: Transaction without redolog

From: John Darrah <jdarrah_at_veripost.net>
Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2002 23:18:20 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <36381c83d490f2e8d992e56374c5ed52.36240@mygate.mailgate.org>


Howard,

I am running an import on a dev DB with the _disable_logging parameter set to true. Before anyone scolds me, yes I have backups. My question is when I query the v$log table the sequence#s are still being incremented. Also, the modification dates on the redo logs themselves seem to be changing. I know that this parameter does do something because I've set it, done a shutdown abort and the db did end up corrupt. I'm wondering why exactly the sequences would be incrementing and what is getting written to the actual log files. My guess is
it probably writing something like "don't even bother trying to use this log for recovery purposes" but was wondering if you or anyone else had a definative answer.
Thanks,

John

"Howard J. Rogers" <dba_at_hjrdba.com> wrote in message news:3c361b14$0$15987$afc38c87_at_news.optusnet.com.au...
> Unless.... unless.... you want to take your life in your hands, and risk
> your entire database becoming utterly unrecoverable (and do something which
> is totally unsupported by Oracle to boot).... there is a hidden parameter
> which can be set in the init.ora called "_disable_logging". Set that to
> TRUE, and absolutely nothing will be logged. Ever. But you'd better pray
> you've got bloody good backups before using it, and whilst you're at it,
> pray that you never have an Instance crash -because you won't be able to
> recover from it.
>
> One site I worked with had a big batch update performed once a month, with
> cold backups taken immediately before and after. For them, _disable_logging
> was a perfectly viable option, and it made the update take place at
> something like three times the speed than before. If anything awful
> happened, they happily signed up to the loss of the update, and reverted to
> their previous cold backup. So there is a use for it, but you really need
> to know what you are doing, and the potential costs involved.
>
> All of which basically amounts to: stick with the short answer. There's
> nothing you can do about it safely if its ordinary DML you're performing.
>
> Regards
> HJR
>

-- 
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
Received on Tue Jan 08 2002 - 17:18:20 CST

Original text of this message

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