Re: Make table read-only

Dave wrote:

> This may go against some people's grain, but as a variation on moving
> the table into and out-of a read-only TS I wouldn't think that there'd
> be much of a downside to dedicating a tablespace to just this table,
> then toggling the status as required.
>
> Or has someone already suggested that?

I think it's been implicit. The point is to use read-only tablespace. How the table gets there is immaterial, really. If it already happens to reside in a tablespace which can be made read-only, so much the better. But I think the assumption has been made in the thread so far that the table is buried in a tablespace along with a lot of other tables -so you can't flip the status of the existing tablespace, because it would affect all those other tables. Hence the suggestion to move it to another tablespace whose read-write status can indeed be modified at will.

There is nothing wrong with a table having a tablespace all to itself. That is the why we have tablespaces, after all: to break a database up into multiple, administratively-convenient, pieces. In this case, if a table needs to flip in and out of read-only mode periodically, then being in its own tablespace makes it capable of being managed in precisely that way without impacting on anything else. It's a thoroughly sensible suggestion.

Regards
HJR Received on Thu Oct 21 2004 - 15:34:39 CDT