HansF wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 14:30:26 -0700, fitzjarrell interested us by writing:
>
> > Committing a transaction in a manner which
> > may or may not get it to the redo logs is questionable and deserves
> > CAREFUL thought and consideration before implementation.
>
> AND yet .... when loading a warehouse, or any place in which all
> transactions are repeatable, this might be perfectly acceptable. If the
> system crashed during a bulk load, wipe and restart might be better than
> recovery.
>
> As you state eelsewhere in your reply, it requires careful consideration
> and an awareness of what is right for the application.
>
> --
> Hans Forbrich
> Canada-wide Oracle training and consulting
> mailto: Fuzzy.GreyBeard_at_gmail.com
> *** I no longer assist with top-posted newsgroup queries ***

I should have said 'production OLTP applications', as that was at the
forefront of my mind as I was typing my response. Certainly a
datawarehouse is a suitable choice for asynchronous commits; such could
decrease the load time and bring the warehouse to availability much
more rapidly than standard commits.

I still stand by my statements with regard to OLTP applications. I
apologise for not making that sentiment clear in my previous response.


David Fitzjarrell