Re: Question: ONE corrupted tablespace in standby db???

> He's right.

Oh, I know he's right. He's also unneccessarily abrasive with people who don't yet know what he considers to be obvious. Even though English is not his first language, and even though he may not intend to come of as sarcastic... it pisses me off. It takes no more energy to just say something useful and to the point (as you've chosen to do) as it does to be sarcastic. It's just not necessary.

> You need to know all the implications of nologging
> operations, they will bite with a standby.

What you kindly posted is precisely what was required to get me on track, and I appreciate your time taken in doing so.

Sybrand is full of useful information, to be sure - he's also full of piss and vinegar, and far too often smacks of arrogance. Again - I know English is his second language, but I still don't appreciate his flippancy, and I won't be shy about saying so. If I'm lucky he'll just kf me. Too bad I can't kf, as I only have access using Google Groups.

Oh well. It is Usenet, I can't expect the world to play by my old-school rules of conduct.

Thanks again, Joel; I'll look into what I can do with that index once I have enough filesystem space to not have to worry about excess redo, which was why I elected to relocate that index without logging in the first place. We do index rebuilds on a weekly basis, so in terms of the primary database, I don't see the redo as being necessary. But now, after thinking about it, it makes perfect sense that logging of all objects is necessary for the standby.

I just hate feeling as if I'm being snickered at as I'm trying to work this stuff out. Gotta wonder if Sybrand was one of the lucky few who never had a learning curve.

BD Received on Mon Jun 19 2006 - 14:15:38 CDT