Re: Additional redo for supplemental logging at table level
From: fairlie rego <fairlie_r_at_yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2011 02:44:59 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <1324637099.61180.YahooMailNeo_at_web45016.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
We were concerned about the same thing when we had to implement this for Golden Gate but the additional redo generated has been minimal. We still have some outstanding issues around DDL replication for GG.
From: "Hameed, Amir" <Amir.Hameed_at_xerox.com> To: oracle-l_at_freelists.org
Sent: Friday, 23 December 2011 4:57 AM
Subject: Additional redo for supplemental logging at table level
Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2011 02:44:59 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <1324637099.61180.YahooMailNeo_at_web45016.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
We were concerned about the same thing when we had to implement this for Golden Gate but the additional redo generated has been minimal. We still have some outstanding issues around DDL replication for GG.
Fairlie Rego
Senior Oracle Consultant
http://el-caro.blogspot.com/
M: +61 402 792 405
From: "Hameed, Amir" <Amir.Hameed_at_xerox.com> To: oracle-l_at_freelists.org
Sent: Friday, 23 December 2011 4:57 AM
Subject: Additional redo for supplemental logging at table level
Hi,
I would like to know if anyone has done any testing on how much
additional redo is generated if supplemental log groups are created on
tables. I know that it will depend on the number of columns in a log
group, column size, data type, etc., but I just want to get an idea
about generally how much additional information (in terms of %age) is
generated for DML statements.
Any feedback will be appreciated.
Thank you
Amir
-- http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l -- http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-lReceived on Fri Dec 23 2011 - 04:44:59 CST