Re: What is different between sql*load(direct=y) and insert /+*append */

TurkBear wrote:

> I also believe that 'direct load' ignores any constraints , I'm not sure about appends..
>
> "M Hashim" <m.a.n.hashim_at_sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
> >clickstream data....yikes!
> >
> >Note also, with "direct load" I don't think you could manipulate the data
> >with any FUNCTIONS as it's being loaded - which you can do otherwise.
> >
> >
> >"Howard J. Rogers" <howardjr2000_at_yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
> >news:Q3nm9.44168$g9.126416_at_newsfeeds.bigpond.com...
> >> Both tools load data into tables above the high watermark, and only move
> >the
> >> high watermark above the 'data line' at the end of the operation (when you
> >> commit or SQL Loader does a data save). Since data is above the high
> >> watermark for the duration of the load, using either tool, it is
> >impossible
> >> to read that data (that's what the HWM's job is, after all: telling full
> >> table scans when to stop looking for data).
> >>
> >> If it's impossible to read the data, then there is no need for either tool
> >> to generate rollback, which is (putting it simply) only needed for the
> >> purposes of constructing read-consistent images of the data *for other
> >> Users' benefit*. They can't see the data, therefore they don't need
> >> read-consistent images of it, therefore no rollback.
> >>
> >> So far, so similar.
> >>
> >> The difference between the two tools is what happens on indexes. SQL
> >Loader
> >> Direct Loads don't update indexes. Append inserts do. Which means that
> >> insert appends are required to generate rollback on the indexes, because
> >the
> >> changes it makes to them during the insert operation *are* visible to
> >other
> >> users, and hence they need to roll them back for read-consistency
> >purposes.
> >>
> >> Regards
> >> HJR
> >>
> >> "David" <dhs_69_at_hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >> news:7e64a3ea.0210011044.706e0261_at_posting.google.com...
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
> >> > We used to use sql*load with direct=y option to load
> >> > our clickstream data,in order to get better performance,
> >> > we recently use " insert /+* append */ "
> >> > approach, but we got "rollback segment too small" error.
> >> >
> >> > how sql*load never got this problem ? what is the different
> >> > between two approachs in oracle?
> >> >
> >> > Thanks
> >> > David
> >>
> >>
> >
>
> -----------== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
> http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
> -----= Over 100,000 Newsgroups - Unlimited Fast Downloads - 19 Servers =-----

Nothing can ignore constraints. The question is rather one of when enforcement takes place.

Daniel Morgan Received on Wed Oct 02 2002 - 10:29:44 CDT