Re: SEQUENCE_CACHE_ENTRIES obsolete?

"Robert William Vesterman" <bob.work_at_vesterman.com> wrote in message news:8dsvftcc7hjaseqfpvs74esouado707teg_at_4ax.com...
> I've been having a problem where our sequences often skip to one more
> than the next multiple of twenty, i.e. 1, 21, 41, 61, 81, 101, 121,
> etc. You'll sometimes see a few numbers in a row, but it quickly goes
> back to skipping, e.g. 141, 142, 143, 161.
>
> Looking into this issue, I found that it's perfectly consistent with
> what would happen if SEQUENCE_CACHE_ENTRIES was too low. Plus, it
> seems that it really was too low, because the default value (10) is
> far less than the number of sequences we use, and we constantly switch
> from one sequence to another.
>
> So, I suggested upping SEQUENCE_CACHE_ENTRIES. They tried this, and
> got "ORA-25138: SEQUENCE_CACHE_ENTRIES initialization parameter has
> been made obsolete".
>
> I've been looking on the web, and I haven't seen anything that says
> what its functionality has been replaced by... does anyone know?
>
> Or is there some other reason why my sequences would be skipping in
> that manner?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bob Vesterman.

This has nothing to do with the SEQUENCE_CACHE_ENTRIES parameters, as that determines or determined, the number of sequences cached, not the number of units cached per sequence.
Your problem occurs when you shutdown and restart the database, and still have numbers in cache: you will loose them. If you rollback a transaction you will loose that number. Etc.
If you really don't want that:
alter sequence <sequence name> nocache order;

Hth,

Sybrand Bakker, Oracle DBA Received on Mon May 14 2001 - 12:19:12 CDT