Re: Option NOLOGGING for indexes

From: Howard J. Rogers <howardjr2000_at_yahoo.com.au>
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 22:31:59 +1100
Message-ID: <pan.2003.03.13.11.31.58.716836@yahoo.com.au>

On Thu, 13 Mar 2003 00:42:34 +0100, Rick Denoire wrote:

> I would agree that in general, changes of valuable data in tables
> should be done with the logging option. But what could be the
> consequence of using the NOLOGGING option for indexes? One could set
> this option at the tablespace level. It would be tolerable for me if
> the index resulted being unusuable after an instance error, since it
> is always possible to rebuild it. Or am I missing something?
>
> Thanks
> Rick Denoire

You're missing the fact that NOLOGGING *never* applies to ordinary inserts, deletes and updates. Therefore, in the context of Indexes, it applies only for the very creation of the index, not its subsequent maintenance by virtue of modifications being done to the table.

An insert to a table still results in a conventional insert into the index, in other words. And that will be logged, whatever your nologging attribute may say.

Regards
HJR Received on Thu Mar 13 2003 - 05:31:59 CST