Re: optimal size for rollback

Hi Nuno,

I'm not too sure it is being sold as a good idea anymore, not here anyway. Too many burnt fingers ...

Hope you have a great break, lucky bugger :)

Richard
"Nuno Souto" <nsouto_at_optushome.com.au.nospam> wrote in message news:3d8dcd7c$0$22173$afc38c87_at_news.optusnet.com.au...
> Sun, 22 Sep 2002 23:11:28 +1000, Richard Foote said (and I quote):
> > snip...
> > And I agree, storage is relatively cheap, but ...
> >
> > Here in sunny Canberra, we're a Government town and most of the key
sites
> > here are Government. And the Australian government has gone through an
> > outsourcing program (bless them) where many key sites have their IT
> > infrastructure outsourced and controlled by the large IT giants. And
guess
> > what, getting additional disk isn't cheap, it's bloody and criminally
> > expensive. And by the time you add all the redundancy disks costs, costs
of
> > maintenance, costs of implementation, costs of support, costs of
breaking
> > your IT requirements, etc, etc, etc. it's a case of "F&#*, how much !!".
>
> Hehehe! Precisely.
>
> >
> > Outsourcing hasn't exactly been a great success ...
> >
> > But I digress.
>
> No, you're on target. Spot on. The whole thing is a racket of the worst
> kind. And we are still being sold it's a great idea...
>
> >
> > One last point. Note that automatic undo management does extra work
'under
> > the covers' which could be viewed as being sub-optimal. I haven't heard
many
> > that suggest using manual rollback segments is the way to go in 9i ...
>
> and yet apparently they are used on the 9i benchmarks?
>
>
> --
> Cheers
> Nuno Souto
> nsouto_at_optushome.com.au.nospam
Received on Sun Sep 22 2002 - 17:18:56 CDT