Re: Block DML!?

From: Howard J. Rogers <hjr_at_dizwell.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 21:22:19 +1000
Message-ID: <411369be$0$18434$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au>

"Mark Townsend" <markbtownsend_at_comcast.net> wrote in message news:41132098.7060500_at_comcast.net...
>
> >
> > Just to add my tuppence-worth: the suggestion to use dbms_redefinition
is
> > inappropriate for your purposes, since you want to insert into a new,
empty
> > table, not to have the existing table be redefined but with all its
existing
> > records still extant (which is what dbms_redefinition will get you).
> >
>
> Well - I did ask why he/she needed a new empty table to insert in. I
> think we should reserve comment on the appropriateness of redefinition
> until we find out how we got here in the first place.

Well, given there was no suggestion in the original post for any need of any kind to actually re-define the table, I reckon we are safe to knock dbms_redefinition on the head, myself.

> The other option is potentially quiese database (subject to some
> restrictions) but I'd still like to know what the actual problem is.

Yikes. Quiescing means "use resource manager". Which rules it out for most people even more than dbms_redef would be!

Regards
HJR Received on Fri Aug 06 2004 - 06:22:19 CDT