Note in-line.
--
Regards
Jonathan Lewis
http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk
The educated person is not the person
who can answer the questions, but the
person who can question the answers -- T. Schick Jr
One-day tutorials:
http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/tutorial.html
____Iceland__November (tbc)
____Belgium__November (EOUG event)
____UK_______December (UKOUG conference)
Three-day seminar:
see http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/seminar.html
____USA__October
____UK___November
The Co-operative Oracle Users' FAQ
http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/faq/ind_faq.html
"Howard J. Rogers" <hjr_at_dizwell.com> wrote in message
news:3f83d530$0$29410$afc38c87_at_news.optusnet.com.au...
> Kurt-Erich Finger wrote:
>
> Neither does switching on archiving in itself generate extra redo.
It merely
> means that a copy of a log is taken once it has been switched away
from.
> The switching away from it in the first place still only happens
because
> the log gets full... and that's only possible if redo is being
generated.
>
There is the detail that CREATE TABLE AS SELECT is
automatically nologging if the database is noarchivelog
mode - the same may be true of indexes by now, but
I don't recall testing it - so a switch from noarchivelog
to archivelog could easily result in extra redo being
generated.
Received on Fri Oct 10 2003 - 10:12:13 CDT
