Re: UNDO poll - was undo segments vs. rbs

From: Fuad Arshad <fuadar_at_yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 19 May 2004 05:32:59 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <20040519123259.70312.qmail@web80505.mail.yahoo.com>

After playing around with the retention time we significantly reduced the amount of undo we were using compared to RBS with autoextend off. Jonathan Lewis <jonathan_at_jlcomp.demon.co.uk> wrote: I'd be interested in a quick poll.

Your case is the first time I've heard of undo space being less than rollback space. Every other comment I've heard has been along the lines of
why has my 1GB rbs t/s grown to 12GB when I switched to undo t/s.

So - out of three options:
Undo much bigger
Undo much smaller
No significant change noticed

Would people like to contribute.

I've changed the subject heading to isolate the poll.

Regards

Jonathan Lewis

http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk

http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/faq/ind_faq.html The Co-operative Oracle Users' FAQ

http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/seminar.html Optimising Oracle Seminar - schedule updated May 1st

Original Message ----- From: "Mercadante, Thomas F" To: Cc:

Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 2004 1:05 PM
Subject: RE: undo segments vs. rbs

Paula,

In our warehouse, we had a RBS tablespace of 25Gig. After conversion to Undo, the Undo Tablespace was reduced to 6 Gig - and I personally think it could be much smaller.

Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com

To unsubscribe send email to: oracle-l-request_at_freelists.org put 'unsubscribe' in the subject line.
--

Archives are at http://www.freelists.org/archives/oracle-l/ FAQ is at http://www.freelists.org/help/fom-serve/cache/1.html

Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com

Received on Wed May 19 2004 - 07:31:27 CDT