Re: diff bewteen 8i and 9i?

"Jonathan Lewis" <jonathan_at_jlcomp.demon.co.uk> wrote in message news:991313383.19703.0.nnrp-12.9e984b29_at_news.demon.co.uk...
>
>
> --
> Jonathan Lewis
> Yet another Oracle-related web site: http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk
>
> Practical Oracle 8i: Building Efficient Databases
> Publishers: Addison-Wesley
>
> Reviews at: http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/book_rev.html
>
>
>
> Nuno Souto wrote in message <3b161fc0.860355_at_news-server>...
> >On Thu, 31 May 2001 19:12:28 +1000, "Howard J. Rogers"
> ><howardjr_at_www.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Incidentally, I forgot to mention: ORA-1555s are a thing of the past,
 since
> >>you can now protect rollback required for read-consisitent image
 preparation
> >>for any given length of time (the default appears to be 30 seconds).
 Must
> >>be worth an upgrade for that fact alone, I'd say.
> >
> >
> >Hehehe! Not so fast, bro Rogers! It's still possible, we just can
> >delay it for quite a while. Or so my reading of David's prezzie lead
> >me to believe.
> >
> >Not sure exactly how that's gonna work. How the heck are we supposed
> >to know what's a sufficient delay? Suck it and see?
> >
>
>
> Of course, it does require you to specify a tablespace
> made of files that can autoextend - then it just lets
> the rollback segments grow as big as necessary.
> It's a nice easy option for slowing the database
> down if you want to be lazy and avoid thinking.
>

God, Jonathan. I reckon you rock up to parties and announce "The Queen Mother's just karked it". Come on.... live a little. Enjoy the excitement of new features that appear to come free (as I imagine PCTINCREASE once did). We'll shake it out eventually, but meanwhile, party like your great-grea-greatt grandmother's just turned 100 and is still capable of walking into her own Rolls Royce.

Regrds
HJR Received on Sat Jul 21 2001 - 23:47:23 CEST