Re: DBMS_ALERT - is it what it's cracked up to be?

> You can set the timeout quite high as far as I remember. Ther
 wait/waitany
> returns as soon as the alert has been signalled AND COMMITTED by the
> signalling transaction. To listen continuously, you have to do it in
 a loop.
>

Unfortunately, the waitone/waitany does *not* return after a COMMIT. It returns after the timeout has been reached. So if I set the timeout to one hour, I won't see any alerts for one hour, regardless if alerts have been signaled before that one hour has elapsed.

That's why I don't really understand how alerts can be useful.

> A thought - why not simply poll your error table? Another idea would
 be to
> use advanced queueing...

I suppose I can poll the table manually - if that is what you are suggesting. However, this isn't the solution I was hoping for.

There wouldn't be many errors written to the table - in fact, there shouldn't be ANY - however, the presence of an error would signal an abnormal database condition that I would want to be alerted to immediately. That's why manual polling isn't the best solution.

Maybe OEM has a way to do this ???

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy. Received on Wed Apr 26 2000 - 00:00:00 CDT