RE: Deletion Of 160 Million Rows.
- From: William B Ferguson <wbfergus@xxxxxxxx>
- To: oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 08:22:35 -0700
This depends on your application, but another way might be as follows:
1. Copy your table to another area.
2. Truncate your original table (truncate is much faster without the =
undo
problem).
3. Insert into the original table from the copy for the records you want
to keep.
4. Truncate, then drop the copy.
Even this will probably take some time, and the original table will be
unusable for the duration, so it might not work for your application. =
But,
if you can live without it for a day or two, this will eliminate (or at
least alleviate) the problem with archive logs and the undo tablespace.
------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Ferguson
U.S. Geological Survey - Minerals Information Team
PO Box 25046, MS-750
Denver, Colorado 80225
Voice (303)236-8747 ext. 321 Fax (303)236-4208
~ Think on a grand scale, start to implement on a small scale ~
-----Original Message-----
From: oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx =
[mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of sheldonquinny@xxxxxxxxx
Sent: Tuesday, February 08, 2005 2:39 AM
To: oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Deletion Of 160 Million Rows.
Hi,
I Would Just LIke To Ask Whether It Is Possible To Delete 60 Million =
Rows.
At A Strech And Without Undo Contention. The Requirenment Is To Delete =
60
Million Records From The 160 Million Records. Its An OLTP System.
Is There An Way To Lessen The Effort Taken By Server Process. SInce Its =
An
OLTP DB. Answers Should Be Related To Oracle 9x.
Sheldon.
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Other related posts:
