Re: sqlplus shutdown "time-out"

  • From: Vitalis <vitalisman@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: Jared Still <jkstill@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 10:12:51 +0200

On 4/21/05, Jared Still <jkstill@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 4/20/05, Vitalis <vitalisman@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >=20
> > (why use "abort" and force a recovery everytime while we could use
> "immediate"
> > in most cases?)
>=20
> =20
>  Because it is faster.

I don't think so, if we're talking about delays caused by active transactio=
ns.

The recovery would have to roll forward the updates that the initial
transaction(s)
had made; then Oracle would have to roll back the work again...
AFAIK it would take longer because of the recovery.

Jerome
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l

Other related posts: