Re: Q:alter table and rollback problem - urgent

On Thu, 4 Mar 2004 16:45:20 -0500, "Mark C. Stock" <mcstockX_at_Xenquery .com> wrote:

>"Ralf Bender" <ralf.bender_at_arcor.de> wrote in message
>news:40479fdf$0$14823$9b4e6d93_at_newsread4.arcor-online.net...
>| Here my last statements:
>| 22:10:32 archiv1:tsAdress>set transaction use rollback segment rbbroll;
>|
>| Transaktion wurde gesetzt.
>|
>| 22:10:32 archiv1:tsAdress> alter table tbl_adress1 modify (name char(40));
>| alter table tbl_adress1 modify (name char(40))
>| *
>| FEHLER in Zeile 1:
>| ORA-01562: Fehler beim Erweitern der Rollback-Segmentnummer .
>|
>| Why won't Oracle use that temporary rollback segment?
>
>alter table is DDL, not DML -- could it be that the alter transaction does
>not affect DDL? (not exactly sure, but might be worth looking into)
 

 Exactly - DDL does a commit both before and after, so it's not the same transaction as the one that had its rollback segment set.

-- 
Andy Hassall <andy_at_andyh.co.uk> / Space: disk usage analysis tool
<http://www.andyh.co.uk> / <http://www.andyhsoftware.co.uk/space>