Re: most expeditious way to update a large number of rows

myl..._at_gmail.com wrote:
> DA Morgan wrote:
> >
> > Unless my guess about your background is incorrect, you didn't respond
> > to that part ... the question not relevant because the size of redo
> > logs does not relate to the size of transactions.
>
> Daniel,
>
> Your guess about my background is partially correct. I've worked with
> Sybase and SQL Server in the past. I don't consider myself a DBA, I
> work _as_ a DBA. It's one of many things on my plate. That's (often)
> the reality of working for a small company.
>
> With Brian's help, I estimated that my update would create 700+ MB of
> redo. You're saying that the size and number of redo log groups is
> irrelevant? It seems I'll see a log switch 13 or so times with my five
> 10 MB log groups.
>
> If that's not the case, I won't even consider changing anything. In
> day to day use, the logs switch at ARCHIVE_LAG_TARGET rather than due
> to filling.
>
> Thanks again,
> Myles

Make that 400+ MB of redo. Received on Mon Oct 16 2006 - 22:15:02 CDT