Re: Oracle Slower than Access?

I didn't reserve the right to be dead wrong, though maybe I should have.

Earlier I wrote...
> >When you send a transaction to Oracle, instead of actually storing the
> >data in the tablespace, it holds it into a rollback segment. Once the
> >transaction is commited, the data is then moved from the rollback
> >segment to the actual table.

cjc_at_interport.net (Cheng-Jih Chen) wrote:
> This isn't quite correct. The rollback segments hold the _old_ data,
> not the data that's been updated. On a commit, the data in the
> relevant tablespace is marked as current, and the rollback segment is
> released. On a rollback, the rollback segment is used to remove the
> new data and reconstruct the old data.

This being the case, why are rollback segments used when inserting rows into an empty tablespace? Are the empty blocks/extents, etc copied from an empty tablespace to the rollback segments?

Shucks, now I gotta go crack open the admin books and read... --
joebrown
@leading.net Received on Thu Oct 01 1998 - 17:13:31 CDT