nologging on tables

[danowillging]

I have a set of 14 tables or so that I load nightly. I truncate first, then load through SQL*LOADR. There are never any UPDATEs, INSERTs or DELETEs on these tables. I also do a nightly full export and do a hot OTB twice a week.

I would like opinions whether I should say NOLOGGING since
in the event of a media crash, I can first do media recovery and then drop the tables and then reload those tables through SQL*LOADR again.

I am trying to minimize the number of archived Re-Do logs I am generating due to disk space problems. I am posting this question because I want to make sure I am not missing anything. I think this is safe....

Thanks

Dan Willging

 

[dspare]

I have a similar situation on a datawarehouse. I have recently set my 13 tables to nologging as reams of archived redo logs were being generated every night. Theoretically, setting those tables to nologging should reduce the amount of redo info generated. I am still collecting data to see if this has actually been the case. If I find a definitive answer in the next day or so I'll let you know.

 

[DaPi]

Every time I've used NOLOGGING or UNRECOVERABLE I've regretted it. Probably because I did not know how to recover correctly . . . perhaps I still don't.

Strongly recommend you try the principle on a test db to make sure you can recover (I hope your'e not relying on those exports for media recovery).

Some more disk will cost less than a heart attack! DaPi - no silver bullet