Re: Very high 'log file sync' wait time with no 'log file parallel write' wait time

DA Morgan wrote:
> joel garry wrote:
>
> > Well, I don't know about the OP, but on one system, if I increased undo
> > to where a script tells me it "should be," I would have to quadruple
> > the tablespace from 10G to 40G. Now, that system
> > has two days online full backups available, so that means an additional
> > 90G.
> >
> > jg
> > --
> > @home.com is bogus.
> > http://geeksaresexy.blogspot.com/2006/01/freeze-your-hard-drive-to-recover-data.html
>
> Only if your backup is brain-dead. Aren't you using RMAN?

I'm using 9i RMAN. What about it? It takes my 10G undo file (which just now is using under 700M) and two other 2G files (which are using about 650M) and puts them into 1 11G piece. I get about 70% compression when I compress the pieces to an off-SAN device.

>
> And just in case someone interprets that answer as meaning you should do
> what the v$ tells you too ... are there any 1555s or other issues?

If I don't kill off leftover sessions nightly, yes. undo retention is 10 hours.

jg

--
@home.com is bogus.
"...that's not how class-action litigation is supposed to work."
http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20061205/news_1b5lerach.html