动网论坛,站长建站首选,国内使用量最多的论坛软件 动网论坛官方技术讨论区 站长工具 申请属于您自己的免费论坛
首页 | 新闻资讯 | 网站运营 | 网络编程 | 数据库 | 服务器 | 网页设计 | 图像媒体 | 网络应用 | 搜索优化 | 资源下载 | 动网主机 | DVBOX
    本站内  互联网 ASP论坛  ASP.Net论坛  PHP论坛
   数据库 → 阅读文章

 FetchingAcrossCommits:WhereIstheSourceoftheProblem?

作者来源: 
阅读 数 304 人次 , 2006-5-11 11:08:00 

Fetching Across Commits: Where Is the Source of the Problem?

By Boris Milrud

Fetching across commits is a common and accepted practice in the Oracle programming world. However, it is not an ANSI-supported operation. According to the ANSI standard, a cursor is invalidated whenever a commit is performed, which means it should be closed and reopened. Hence, you should be aware of potential ORA-01555 errors and the fact that you are relying on a cursor behavior that is not to the ANSI standard.

Oracle always enforces statement-level read consistency. This guarantees that the data returned by a single query is consistent with respect to the time when the query began. Therefore, a query never sees the data changes made by the transactions that commit during the course of a query's execution.

As I described in asp">my previous 10-Minute Solution on this subject, Oracle uniquely identifies any given point in time by a set of numbers, called the System Change Numbers. To ensure read consistency, Oracle marks the current SCN as the query enters the execution phase. The query can see the snapshot of the records only as they were at the time that they were marked by, or assigned to, the SCN.

This is the situation when a query opens a cursor, then loops through fetching, changing, and committing the records on the same table. The cursor requires a "snapshot" of the data at the cursor's open time for read consistency. As data blocks are read on behalf of the query and each block contains uncommitted changes of other transactions or changed data with more recent SCNs, the data is then reconstructed using the saved snapshot from the rollback segments. During a long-running query, undo entries in the rollback segment may get overwritten by another transaction, even from the same query. In this case, the Oracle server would be unable to reconstruct the snapshot, resulting in the ORA-01555 error.

Here's an example: A cursor is opened at SCN=10. The execution SCN of the query is then marked as SCN=10. Every fetch by that cursor now needs to get the read-consistent data from SCN=10. Code in the stored procedure is fetching records from the cursor, changing them, and committing them. Let's say they were committed with SCN=20. If a later fetch happens to retrieve a record that's in one of the previously committed blocks, then the fetch will see that the current block SCN is 20. Because the fetch has to get the snapshot from SCN=10 it will try to find it in the rollback segments. If it can roll sufficiently back as previously explained, then it will be able to reconstruct the snapshot from SCN=10. If not, it will return the ORA-01555 error.

Committing less often, thus creating larger rollback segments, will reduce the probability of getting this error. The only drawback to this is that the developer has to contact the DBA and make sure the rollback segments can be extended, and that the rollback tablespace can accommodate them.

读这种文章还是有收获的。让你明白一些事情。

  
 
 收藏本文  打印本文  论坛讨论  关闭窗口
· 上一篇:LOG FILE 归档怎样做
· 下一篇:Oracle基本数据类型存储格式浅析(四)——ROWID类型(一)
· 浅析Access与Office其他成员之间交流数据
· oracle 日期函数介绍
· 存储过程编写经验和优化措施
· sql交叉查询
· ACCESS入门教程(一)初识Access 2000


关于本站 | 联系我们 | 业务合作 | 客户案例 | 诚聘英才 | 广告合作 | 收藏本站
海口动网先锋网络科技有限公司版权所有
Copyright © 2000 - 2006 Cndw.Com
中华人民共和国电信与信息服务业务经营许可证编号 琼 ICP 020077