imp commit=n and rbs

From: Norman Dunbar <Norman.Dunbar_at_lfs.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 09:55:30 +0100
Message-ID: <E2F6A70FE45242488C865C3BC1245DA7039B1A8F@lnewton.leeds.lfs.co.uk>

Hi Joel,

on import you'll have lots of new rows being inserted - so lots of 18 byte rowids end up in the rbs in case of a rollback. Plus you need details for changes to sys.fet$ and sys.uet$ which also change as extents are used and no longer free. Plus you have index creation details to rollback. Plus any details of autoextending files. Constraints being created.
...
Etc.

This might go somewher in explaining the size of the rollback.

Cheers,
Norm.

---

Norman Dunbar
Database/Unix administrator
Lynx Financial Systems Ltd.
mailto:Norman.Dunbar_at_LFS.co.uk

Tel: 0113 289 6265
Fax: 0113 289 3146
URL: http://www.Lynx-FS.com
-------------------------------------

-----Original Message-----
From: joel-garry_at_home.com (Joel Garry) [mailto:joel-garry_at_home.com] Posted At: Friday, April 25, 2003 11:54 PM Posted To: server
Conversation: imp commit=n and rbs
Subject: Re: imp commit=n and rbs

>> Yeah, I know all that, I'm just wondering why the rollback is _so_
>> much larger than the table? This has bothered me for years.
Received on Mon Apr 28 2003 - 03:55:30 CDT