On Oct 18, 2:21 am, "Jonathan Lewis" <jonat...@jlcomp.demon.co.uk>
> "Noons" <wizofo...@yahoo.com.au> wrote in messageMy (admittedly muddled) thoughts on reading Noon's comments were:
> That was such an obvious design flaw that I raised it at (I think) one of
> The point I made was in reply to the "you only need one of each background
> The follow-up answer to this was that you are able to define multiple log
> Jonathan Lewishttp://jonathanlewis.wordpress.com/all_postings
> Author: Oracle Core (Apress 2011)http://www.apress.com/9781430239543
Maybe this could really be an extension, conceptually anyways, of
private redo log threads (including the part about falling back to
"old ways" when the "new ways" are inappropriate); and not to
discount the Exadata ability to write the same thing to different
devices including non-volatile memory - why assume that architecture
would stay specific to Exadata (aside from the obvious milking maximum
money)? Which kind of begs the question of how to deal with redo when
you have no spinning rust at all (as already kind-of asked on the
forums, and there was a Linus Q&A session on /. where he mentioned his
The stock market discounts 6-12 months ahead. Physical DB
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.