Fw: Destination address unreachable
i don't believe that external tables can be indexed yet. you've got parallel query, though... - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 4:23 AM Subject: RE: Data Purging Strategy Another poor man's solution would be to unload the tables into flat files and attach to them as needed using Oracle's external table feature from 9i. That solution should hold for quite a while into the future since the external table function is very much like SQL*Loader, which is so integral to so many systems that Oracle is not going to think about making it 'go away'. You would still run into problems if there is some substantive change that makes the external tables from 9i invalid, but that still leaves you with flat files that you can load back into the DB with SQL*Loader. Chris Gait On 6 Nov 2002 at 6:43, Conboy, Jim wrote: Date sent: Wed, 06 Nov 2002 06:43:38 -0800 To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L ORACLE- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send reply to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Organization: Fat City Network Services, San Diego, California A poor man's solution might be to load the offline database with appropriate data, then do a tablespace export and store the results on CD labelled by date. Restoring needed data would entail a tablespace import of stuff from the appropriate CD into the offline DB. I'm sure here's some gotchas involved but some variation on that theme might work. Jim -Original Message- Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 8:49 AM To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L This is a data-archival requirement, not a data-purge requirement. It only resembles a purge requirement based on the multiple-database-migration strategy you outlined. There are alternatives... Depending on the volume of data in your database and your availability requirements, implementing table- and index-partitioning will likely be crucial. One strategy is to have the most-active tables partitioned by a date column and have different sets of these partitions reside in time-variant tablespaces. With this arrangement, you can archive data to tape by simply setting the archived tablespaces to READ ONLY and then migrating them to tape-based (instead of disk-based) file-systems and bringing them back online. Legato has this file-system technology (recently purchased) and there is a share-ware product called SAMFS which is an HSM (hierarchical storage mgmt) filesystem used by some vendors (i.e. StorageTek, etc). By setting tablespaces to READ ONLY it becomes very easy to move them from disk to tape while retaining them within the same original database, simplifying the task of later retrieval (which is really important). Of course, Oracle's partitioning option is enormously expensive, but in this case it is a matter of the upfront license costs (with reduced downstream implementation costs due to simplicity) versus a large downstream application-development cost. In this situation, I think roughly offsets everything. Since I'm not spending the money, I can afford such a calculation... :-) With the various storage technologies available, a single database can straddle several simultaneously, optimizing performance or cost as needed. Some files might reside on solid-state NVRAM disk, some on SAN-based disk, some on NAS-based storage, and then finally reside in archive media file-systems such as tape or magneto-optical based HSM file-systems. - Original Message - To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L mailto:ORACLE-L;fatcity.com Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 2:13 AM Dear List, I need some inputs from you all regarding purging data from the database. This is the requirement We define a retention period for all the data in the system. When the retention period is reached, the data should be deleted, but then at a later time, some user might request for this purged data. So it must be possible to retrieve this data. This is the strategy we have designed for this. When the retention period is reached, move the data from the main database to an offline database. Then delete the data from the main database. In the offline database, we cannot again keep it from long, so it has to moved to tapes. Now my question, how can we move this data to tapes and at the same time retrieve data from the tapes based on dates. i.e, the user will ask for the data on a particular date, so it must be possible to retrieve data from the tapes based on a date and load it to the database tables. Regards Prem -- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com -- Author: INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fat City Network Services-- 858-538-5051 http://www.fatcity.com San Diego,
FW: Destination address unreachable
Is it that Oracle's business model is pushing these releases or is it the rapid pace of technology change and the demand of the user for features? The push to the web, XML, Java, and new feature requests (rename column, fk's , drop column, etc...). Then there is competition too that has to be considered. If Oracle doesn't keep up with the Joneses as it were, what kind of market share will it have 5 and 10 years down the line. So, in my opinion, Oracle really has no choice but to pursue the course that it is. I think they have learned some lessons down the road, and I'm willing to bet that 10.0.1 (or whatever) will be far more stable than 9.0.1 was. RF Robert G. Freeman - Oracle OCP Oracle Database Architect CSX Midtier Database Administration Author of several Oracle books you can find on Amazon.com! Londo Mollari: Ah, arrogance and stupidity all in the same package. How efficient of you. -Original Message- Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 12:54 PM To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L does this bother anybody else as much as it bothers me? just what is Oracle's business model for pushing these release's out this fast? are there that many new features, or a market to capture, that justifies this? makes no sense to me. the shelf life of an oracle release is now about a year and a half. Tom Mercadante Oracle Certified Professional -Original Message- Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 11:44 AM To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L Heard from Tom Kyte that 10i should be out by Dec'03. He also said that the code is already frozen and beta testing is going on. Prakash -Original Message- Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2002 14:09 To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L The day we all finish upgrading our databases to 9i. Sunil Nookala DBA Dell Corp. -Original Message- Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2002 12:09 PM To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L Has anyone heard when Oracle will be releasing version 10i? -- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com -- Author: Pall, Tom [Contractor] INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fat City Network Services-- 858-538-5051 http://www.fatcity.com San Diego, California-- Mailing list and web hosting services - To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing). -- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com -- Author: INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fat City Network Services-- 858-538-5051 http://www.fatcity.com San Diego, California-- Mailing list and web hosting services - To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing). -- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com -- Author: BALA,PRAKASH (HP-USA,ex1) INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fat City Network Services-- 858-538-5051 http://www.fatcity.com San Diego, California-- Mailing list and web hosting services - To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing). -- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com -- Author: Mercadante, Thomas F INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fat City Network Services-- 858-538-5051 http://www.fatcity.com San Diego, California-- Mailing list and web hosting services - To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing). -- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com -- Author: Freeman, Robert INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fat City Network Services-- 858-538-5051 http://www.fatcity.com San Diego, California-- Mailing list and web hosting services - To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list,
FW: Destination address unreachable
Certification has become a bear, in my eyes. 8i was hard enough with all it's new features, but 9i has just a ton of new features (and 9iR2 even more). The 9i OCP Upgrade Exam, IMHO, is probably the most difficult of any of them because it covers a much wider scope of material than any of the other exams did. Yet, I don't think that passing the 9iOCP (or any certification) makes you an expert. That passing scores are something like 55 or 60%, should tell you somethin'. RF Robert G. Freeman - Oracle OCP Oracle Database Architect CSX Midtier Database Administration Author of several Oracle books you can find on Amazon.com! Londo Mollari: Ah, arrogance and stupidity all in the same package. How efficient of you. -Original Message- Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 1:20 PM To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L -Original Message- just what is Oracle's business model for pushing these release's out this fast? It sells books and certification classes. At our shop, we have started to blow off certification now that Oracle has gotten so ridiculous about it. -- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com -- Author: Stephen Lee INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fat City Network Services-- 858-538-5051 http://www.fatcity.com San Diego, California-- Mailing list and web hosting services - To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing). -- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com -- Author: Freeman, Robert INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fat City Network Services-- 858-538-5051 http://www.fatcity.com San Diego, California-- Mailing list and web hosting services - To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).
FW: Destination address unreachable
Geraldo, Thanks for the advice. It's interesting that the Migration manual states something like the only difference between 32 and 16 bit is the PL/SQL compiled code - there is no difference in the data files. Since it all gets recompiled anyway, I was wondering why we could not go directly to 64 bit. Thanks to everyone who responded to my original question. Tom Mercadante Oracle Certified Professional -Original Message- Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2002 5:45 PM To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L If you are using the manual upgrade method, then you can go from 32-bit 8.1.7 to 64-bit 9.2.0.1 directly. Don't quote me though, because all the documentation I have seen says that you have to first go from 32-bit 8.1.7 to 32-bit 9.2.0.1 and then to 64-bit 9.2.0.1. I think Oracle is just being extra cautious here. I have recently upgraded (manual upgrade) a dev database from 32-bit 8.1.7 to 64-bit 9.2.0.1 (directly) and so far have not seen anything unusual. HTH, Gerardo -Original Message- Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2002 12:39 PM To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L Dennis, You da'man. Thank you! Tom Mercadante Oracle Certified Professional -Original Message- Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2002 3:23 PM To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L file $ORACLE_HOME/bin/oracle -Original Message- Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2002 2:04 PM To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L I know this was discussed a short time ago, but how do I determine if the Oracle 817 version installed on a Sun Unix box is 32 or 64 bit? I'm looking at migrating to 9.2/64 bit and noticed that I cannot directly migrate a 32bit version to 64 bit. Thanks Tom Mercadante Oracle Certified Professional -- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com -- Author: Mercadante, Thomas F INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fat City Network Services-- (858) 538-5051 FAX: (858) 538-5051 San Diego, California-- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).
