"VC" <boston103_at_hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:31e0625e.0310300645.4c908003_at_posting.google.com...
> Hello Ben,
>
> The behaviour you're observing is explained by Oracle 9i's creating
> _two_ ITL slots instead of one despite your specifying 'initrans 1'.
> It can be easily verified by dumping the data block.
>
> If you perform an update #3 on row #3 in addition to the two you've
> already initiated, you'll get the desired effect.
This must be some new definition of the word 'desired' with which I am
unfamiliar.
--
Niall Litchfield
Oracle DBA
Audit Commission Uk
Received on Thu Oct 30 2003 - 09:43:33 CST
