Re: different ways of archiving current redo log

Sybrand Bakker <gooiditweg_at_sybrandb.demon.nl> wrote in message news:<4k2160t2lnakhr2maob5odr8cb3v7iontb_at_4ax.com>...
> On 23 Mar 2004 10:48:47 -0800, premmehrotra_at_hotmail.com (Prem K
> Mehrotra) wrote:
>
> >I have seen different ways of archiving logs and want to clarify their
> >usage:
> >
> >1. alter system switch logfile
> >
> >Does this command really archives current redo log before switch, or
> >it simply switches and archiving is done later in background
> >(asynchronus manner)
>
> will switch the logfile and archive the previous log file when
> necessary. So possible consecutive operation, which is not the same as
> asynchronous.
>
> >
> >2. alter system archive log current:
> >I will think this command will actually archive the current log and
> >then only swtch to next log, i.e, archiving and next log are
> >synchronus operations.
>
> Will archive the current log *when necessary*. It will NOT switch the
> log.
> May do nothing, when the log doesn't need archiving.
> >
> >3. alter system archive log all:
> >This command will archive all filled redo logs but will not complete
> >current log because it will not be full.
> >
> >
> Will archive all logs *that need archiving*.
> May do nothing
>
>
> >Thanks,
> >
> >Prem

Sybrand:
When you say in 2 it will not switch the log, do you mean to say that after archiving is done, same redo log will be used as the current log. I have not
seen that using archive log list or select * from v$log.

Prem Received on Tue Mar 23 2004 - 21:02:40 CST