Re: Risk in using sequence number?

Thanks to all who respond, I should be clearer in my questions.

This event will be user driven, however, the rate of change will be less than 1 per second. We are not using OPS.

My concern is that will sequence number ever get reset other than someone manually reset it?

"John Darrah" <jdarrah_at_veripost.net> wrote in message news:701b1758b01742f288d9f3ec34abed7f.36240_at_mygate.mailgate.org...
> You don't give enough information to determine whether or not your
> developer is correct or not.
> This developer is most certainly correct if:
>
> 1 you have multiple users / processes generating events. In this case
> even going down to 100ths of seconds still leaves a chance for a race
> condition to occur.
> 2 you are not running OPS. There may ba a more meaningfull key to put
> here but on single instance Oracle, there much fewer "what if" scenerios
> with sequences.
> 3 have a rate of transactions that is high enough that it could outpace
> dbms_utility.get_time. My bet is a well cached sequence will beat the
> get_time procedure in terms of performance.
>
> Your developer is wrong if:
> 1 you use OPS. This is a real can of worms any way you look at it. The
> sequence is no longer reliable at a point in time reference so you can't
> use it. I imagine sysdate could pose a problem as well due to A) race
> conditions and B) two nodes not being synched on time
> 2 your events happen serially at a rate of less then 1 per second.
>
> One thing to consider might be to look at Advanced Queues. I'm pretty
> sure they guarentee that records will come out in a FIFO order.
>
> Good Luck
>
> P.S. Everyone please feel free to shoot holes in the points I made.
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
Received on Fri Feb 22 2002 - 10:05:17 CST