Re: sqlplus shutdown "time-out"

On 4/21/05, Jared Still <jkstill_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> On 4/20/05, Vitalis <vitalisman_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> >=20
> > (why use "abort" and force a recovery everytime while we could use
> "immediate"
> > in most cases?)

>=20

I don't think so, if we're talking about delays caused by active transactio= ns.

The recovery would have to roll forward the updates that the initial transaction(s)
had made; then Oracle would have to roll back the work again... AFAIK it would take longer because of the recovery.

Jerome

--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l