Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid

Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.server -> Re: shutdown abort and database consistency

Re: shutdown abort and database consistency

From: Daniel Morgan <>
Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2002 23:23:40 GMT
Message-ID: <>

Rick Denoire wrote:

> Hello
> I have a fundamental question concerning the consistency of Oracle DB
> under certain circumstances (Version 8.1.7, Solaris)
> It happened that a long running script was startet, which would delete
> millions of lines in one transaction. After two days, the DB crashed
> while some other operations were being done. That means, it showed the
> error ORA-00600 and then it just didn't react to SQL queries any more.
> The long running job mentioned was set to nologging.
> The next day, the DB was "shutdown abort" and restartet. Now there
> seems to be a problem since for some reason some objects can't be
> dropped: The session goes into an undefinite wait state and nothing
> happens. But a full, consistent export (rows=no) of the DB structures
> works fine, so I would assume that the DB is still healthy.
> Now I am wondering if an Oracle DB is able to recover from uncommited
> transactions that are not being logged in redo logs. And I am
> wondering if a "shutdown abort" could render the DB inconsistent in
> this situation. As I understand, a "shutdown abort" should be the last
> thing to do, it is like a provoked crash. By the way, the size and
> number of the Rollback Segments are huge in this DB.
> So why was this "shutdown abort" done anyway? Because the employee
> doing that wanted to avoid the job being rolled back - it was running
> 2 days already. And he would have had to wait to days more for the DB
> to close after issuing "shutdown immediate".
> I very much appreciate your opinions on this matter.
> Rick Denoire.

ORA-00600 means one thing and one thing only. Open an iTAR at and work with Oracle Support.

You finally get to collect on all of the money you've been paying on your support contract.

Daniel Morgan Received on Mon Jul 08 2002 - 18:23:40 CDT

Original text of this message