Re: Monitoring local transaction outcomes for external text indexes

From: Thomas Rask <thomas_rask_at_hotmail.com>
Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 18:03:06 +0200
Message-ID: <kv4ncv806nihufsfuseg5mmvbvkbg4nmom@4ax.com>

Thanks,

It looks as a way to get information on committed transactions. It doesn't give me information about rolled back transactions. But this is not as important as the committed ones anyway.

I am not sure though if it is the nicest way to do this. For instance, if a transaction involves hundreds of updates, can I make sure that I do not spawn hundreds of jobs? One should suffice.

Can I be sure also that the job is executed immediately after the commit?

Thomas

N.B. Performance increase of several magnitutes and an unlimited number of parallel transactions as far as the index is concerned.

On Wed, 21 May 2003 13:54:37 GMT, "Jim Kennedy" <kennedy-down_with_spammers_at_attbi.com> wrote:

>I doubt you really have incredible speed, but why not have a trigger that
>fires off a dbms_job. The dbms_job won't run unless the transaction is
>committed.(thus it is part of the transaction)
>Jim
Received on Wed May 21 2003 - 11:03:06 CDT