Re: shutdown abort warnings
- From: "Finn Jorgensen" <finn.oracledba@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: Joel.Patterson@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2008 15:28:43 -0400
It's been a very long time since I saw corruption due to a shutdown abort.
Then again, I don't use it very often at all.
The article is a mix of some specifics (like the v$session/v$process
queries) and some generalization (like the shutdown/startup procedures) and
the generalized text suffers. I wouldn't advertise shutdown aborts as a
great way of shutting a db down, but I don't see corruption either. As a
matter of fact doesn't products like VCS and MC/ServiceGuard use shutdown
abort on controlled failovers to minimize shutdown time?
Here's something orphaned that I did see recently. On a Sun E6900 there were
Shared Memory segments owned by Oracle not attached to by anyone. 50GB of
them. That's a whole lot of wasted memory. It took us a while to man up
enough to use ipcrm to remove them as it was on a production server with
several other running oracle instances.
Finn
On 4/16/08, Joel.Patterson@xxxxxxxxxxx <Joel.Patterson@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
> I was reading (and contributed my .02£), to the forum discussion awhile
> ago concerning shutdown abort yet came across this advice and warnings of
> possible corruption still being advertised.
>
> Does this lend credit to the institution, or take points away? The
> leanings where very much favorable to abort with much in depth analysis.
>
> http://www.embarcadero.co.uk/resources/tech_papers/oracleorphan.pdf
>
> If so, one wonders.... (not that I have any intention of utilizing there
> services in the first place... it is simply academic).
>
> --
> //www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
>
>
>
Other related posts:
