howto update meterialized view log's pctused larger than 0 on oracle 9.2.0.1

[haomiao]

Hi
I want to create a meterialized view log with pctused larger than
0, but failed.
My oracle is 9.2.0.1.

First, I use
create materialized view log on tbl_term_inf tablespace
tjsplog;
then through toad, I find the pctused is 0. This will cause my
table space grow
fill under large pressure.

Then, I use
create materialized view log on tbl_term_inf tablespace
tjsplog pctfree 5 pctused 60;
the pctfree is changed, but pctused is still 0.

Then I use
alter materialized view log on tbl_term_inf pctused 60;
still not work.

How can I change this parameter in 9.2.0.1?
Is this a bug of 9.2.0.1?

[DA Morgan]

Why would you want to create an MV log witha PCTFREE other than 0?
Why would you want to work in an unsupported product?
Why would you want to work in an unpatched product?

Do you understand what an MV log is and does? Why leave empty room
in a block? A desire to waste disk space? Please explain your
reasoning or read the docs. And, either way, upgrade to something
supported and patched.
--
Daniel A. Morgan
Oracle Ace Director & Instructor
University of Washington
damo...@x.washington.edu (replace x with u to respond)
Puget Sound Oracle Users Group
www.psoug.org

[haomiao]

> Why would you want to create an MV log witha PCTFREE other than 0?

I did some MV freshing test.
Machine1(9207) Machine2(9201) Machine3(9207)
There is a table tbl_term_inf on both Machine2 and Machine3
with MV log.
I want to fresh two tbl_term_inf tables to Machine1. The fresh
period is 1 minute.
On both Machine2 and Machine3, there are a lot of update on
tbl_term_inf.
The result is
fresh from Machine3 is ok
fresh from Machine2 is ok first, after some minutes, the table
space is full, and updating fail.
I find that
in 9207, MV log 's default pctused is 30
in 9201, MV log 's default pctused is 0
I guess that it is perhaps this 0 pctused parameter which cause
tablespace full. But I can not alter this parameter in 9201 larger
than 0.

Or there is some other reason of this full table space?

> Why would you want to work in an unsupported product?
> Why would you want to work in an unpatched product?

This 9201 is used in my company's product emvironment, so it is not
easy to update.

[Michael Austin]

Sorry, but any company that cannot stay on a CURRENT, SUPPORTED AND
PATCHED environment deserves the outcome of their decision.

[haomiao]

> Sorry, but any company that cannot stay on a CURRENT, SUPPORTED AND
> PATCHED environment deserves the outcome of their decision.

Yes, I agree. Our system is a OLTP system and must work 7*24, the
boss are very careful of upgrading os or database.

No way in 9201?