creating index Impdp and parallel

Similar Questions

• Events of waiting "log file parallel write" / "log file sync", in CREATE INDEX

  Hello guys,.
  my current project I'm running a few tests of performance for oracle data guard. The question is "How LGWR SYNC transfer influence the performance of the system?"
  For the performance of the values, that I can compare I just built a normal oracle database in the first step.
  
  Now I perform various tests such as creating index 'broad', massive parallel inserts/validations, etc to get the marks.
  
  My database is an oracle 10.2.0.4 with multiplexed on AIX log files.
  
  I create an index on a table of "normal"... I have run "dbms_workload_repository.create_snapshot ()" before and after the CREATE INDEX for an equivalent period for the AWR report.
  Once the index is built (round about 9 GB), I made an awrrpt.sql for the AWR report.
  
  And now take a look at these values of the AWR

                                                                     Avg
                                               %Time  Total Wait    wait     Waits
  Event                                 Waits  -outs    Time (s)    (ms)      /txn
  ---------------------------- -------------- ------ ----------- ------- ---------
  ......
  ......
  log file parallel write              10,019     .0         132      13      33.5
  log file sync                           293     .7           4      15       1.0
  ......
  ......

  How can it be possible?
  
  With regard to the documentation
  
  -> synchronization of log file: http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/B19306_01/server.102/b14237/waitevents003.htm#sthref3120

  Wait Time: The wait time includes the writing of the log buffer and the post.

  -> log file parallel write: http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/B19306_01/server.102/b14237/waitevents003.htm#sthref3104

  Wait Time: Time it takes for the I/Os to complete. Even though redo records are written in parallel, the parallel write is not complete until the last I/O is on disk.

  This was also my understanding... "log file sync" wait time should be higher than the 'parallel log writing' timeout, because of, it includes the e/s and the response time for the user's session.
  I could accept it, if the values are near each other (perhaps around 1 second about altogether)... but the difference between 132 and 4 seconds is too visible.
  
  Is the behavior of the log file sync/write different when you do a DOF as CREATE INDEX (maybe async... like you can influence it with COMMIT_WRITE initialization parameter?)?
  You have no idea how these values born?
  
  
  Ideas/thoughts are welcome.
  
  Thanks and greetings
  

• alternative to delete and re-create indexes

  Hi all
  
  We use Oracle 11.2.0.2. We have a script where we fall before the full update of a table, the indexes and re-create indexes to improve performance.
  
  Rather than a drop and recreate indexes, I wanted to know if there's another approach better to achieve performance gains.
  
  I thought make unusable index and rebuild later. Would it not be better to drop and re-create the index.
  
  Thanks for your time.

  >
  I thought make unusable index and rebuild later. Would it not be better to drop and re-create the index.
  >
  This is exactly the right strategy to use. He does need to get the benefit of the performance, and there is no danger of inadvertently re-create the index with the wrong settings or in the wrong table space.

  See understanding when to use unusable index or Invisible in the DBA Guide
  http://docs.Oracle.com/CD/E11882_01/server.112/e25494/indexes002.htm#CIHJIDJG
  >
  Unusable index

  An unusable index is ignored by the optimizer, and is not maintained by DML. One of the reasons to make an unusable index are to improve the performance of loading in bulk. (Loads in bulk, go faster if the database is not required to manage the index when inserting rows.) Instead of letting fall the index and later re-creation, requiring you to remember the exact parameters of the CREATE INDEX statement, you can make the index unusable and then rebuild.

• to delete and re-create indexes

  Hello.
  
  You get the following error reported for work seek to purge the CC:
  ORA-08102
  
  According to the note of the Oracle, he must drop and re-create the index FND_CONCURRENT_REQUEST_N1.
  
  Can someone please advise the best way to to do? Is there a standard way to do this? (Should we stop managers cc? Database? EBS together?) What are the commands?
  
  Thank you all.
  
  Oracle 10.2.0.4
  Windows 2008
  EBS 11.5.10.2
  
  DA

  1. Get FND_CONCURRENT_REQUEST_N1 DDL
  THE VALUE OF 10000 LONG
  SELECT dbms_metadata.get_ddl ('INDEX', 'FND_CONCURRENT_REQUEST_N1') FROM dual;

  (2) delete the index.
  DROP INDEX FND_CONCURRENT_REQUEST_N1

  3. run the DDL
  CREATE INDEXES FND_CONCURRENT_REQUEST_N1...

  Nothing else is necessary.

• Creating indexes and a default tablespace

  Hi Experts,
  
  Need your help to understand a basic tablespace clause when creating any object.
  I have a table owned by the user and reside on tuberculosis tablspace, table A has two indices i1 and i2, index i1 A user-owned and created by error index i2 belonging to user B.
  index i1 resides on the tb_index tablespace, i2 index created by mistake lies also on same tablespace tb_index.
  I have a question above given the scenario
  
  I2 index that was created by mistake lies in tablespace tb_index, despite mentioning any tablespace clause. How it can be created on the tb_index tablespace when the developer did not mention the tablespace.
  tablespace tb_index is neither database tablspace default is default not storage for user B.
  
  No idea about this help me a lot.
  
  Thank you

  Maybe something like that happening?

  SQL> conn / as sysdba
  Connected.
  SQL> conn test/test
  Connected.
  SQL> select * from user_indexes;
  
  no rows selected
  
  SQL> select table_name, tablespace_name from user_tables;
  
  TABLE_NAME                     TABLESPACE_NAME
  ------------------------------ ------------------------------
  TAB1                           USERS
  
  SQL> conn / as sysdba
  Connected.
  SQL> grant create any index to system;
  
  Grant succeeded.
  
  SQL> conn system/oracle
  ERROR:
  ORA-28002: the password will expire within 7 days
  
  Connected.
  SQL> conn test/test
  Connected.
  
  SQL> revoke index on tab1 from system;
  
  Revoke succeeded.
  
  SQL> conn system/oracle
  ERROR:
  ORA-28002: the password will expire within 7 days
  
  Connected.
  SQL> create index tidx on test.tab1(a);
  
  Index created.
  
  SQL> set pagesize 9999
  SQL> select index_name, table_name, tablespace_name, owner from all_indexes where table_name='TAB1'
    2  ;
  
  INDEX_NAME                     TABLE_NAME
  ------------------------------ ------------------------------
  TABLESPACE_NAME                OWNER
  ------------------------------ ------------------------------
  TIDX                           TAB1
  SYSTEM                         SYSTEM
  

  HTH
  Aman...

• create indexes and internal error

  Hi, I run
  
  CREATE INDEX idx_nu_account_id_ ON archost
  (
  acc_id ASC
  )
  tablespace ts_idx
  /
  so happen "ORA-00600: internal error code, arguments: [ksuloget2], [0xFDD1F948], 'this message; '
  
  Also I during the exec select * archost then if record is going to get all the return even error why?

  What version of Oracle?
  What platform (OS)?

  I found two problem reports to Oracle on this error. The two refer to an LMS > 1 and are Windows specific. If you are under Windows see Oracle support documents: 564784.1 and 5935415.

  You can open a SR if the adjustment to see if there was a patch created. Otherwise, you can try using a smaller CMS framework.

  HTH - Mark D Powell.

• How to create indexes on columns all - the flames begin

  Yes read you it correctly.

  Is it possible to create a procedure that will create an index on each column in a table without specifying the column names?

  index_all_cols exec ('xxx', 'parallel');

  You ask why? There is no reason that I can give you that will quench the flames coming my way. But, finally, it's because (1) I am tired of using excel to generate create statements of the index and (2) I want the speed at the expense of everything else, (3) I do not use a mouse... I know, I would hate first.

  Jason

  Oracle 10g

  ... at least I didn't to index every column in every table in my diagram!

  Had, it works!

  CREATE OR REPLACE PROCEDURE index_all_cols (pTABLENAME IN varchar2)

  IS

  CURSOR c1 IS SELECT distinct COLUMN_NAME FROM USER_TAB_COLS WHERE TABLE_NAME = pTABLENAME;

  BEGIN

  FOR c IN c1 LOOP

  BEGIN EXECUTE IMMEDIATE 'create index X_ "| c.COLUMN_NAME |' WE ' | pTABLENAME | ' ('| c.COLUMN_NAME |') parallel logging ";

  -EXCEPTION WHILE some other THEN NULL;

  END;

  END LOOP;

  COMMIT;

  END index_all_cols;

  /

  ... and not even a flame

• Inactive workers in IMPDP with parallel option

  Hello gurus,
  
  I took an export datapump to a partitioned table 29GB with the following parameters and was extremely quick (< 10 minutes):
  
  parallel = 4
  = 500MB file size
  Directory = PUMP_DIR
  estimate statistics =
  dumpfile=exp%U.dmp
  REUSE_DUMPFILES = y
  logfile = export.log
  tables = user1.t1
  
  Export product 4 parallel workers who were active all the time, so why the high speed.
  
  However when I tried to take an import datapump on the same database on an empty table (different schema), the performance was very poor (55 minutes):
  
  parallel = 4
  Directory = PUMP_DIR
  dumpfile=exp%U.dmp
  logfile = Import.log
  tables = user1.t1
  remap_schema = user1:user2
  TABLE_EXISTS_ACTION = add
  
  I noticed that parallel workers have been slowed down all the time (not applicable the degree of parallelism, I used) and importation of all was serialized.
  
  Can someone give me an idea why parallel workers were slowed during the IMPDP?
  
  
  [r00tb0x | http://www.r00tb0x.com]

  You see, I'll assume that you do a single importation of the data, or at the very least, your tables already exist and you import partitioned tables. If that's true, then you hit a situation that we know. Here's what happens:

  This is true for tables partitioned and sous-partitionnee and only if the Data Pump task that loads the data have not also created the table. The last part of the previous sentence is what makes this real. If you run a Data Pump task that simply creates the tables, and then run another task import which loads the data, even when they come from the same dumpfile, you will hit this situation. The situation is:

  When the task Data Pump that load data into a table partitioned or sous-partitionnée has not created the table, and then Data Pump cannot be sure
  the partitioning key is the same. For this reason, when loading the Data Pump data, it comes out a table lock and it blocks any other parallel to load in this table workers. If the task Data Pump created the table, then only a lock partition or subpartition is underwritten and other workers are free to subscribe locks on different partitions/subpartitions in the same table.

  I suppose that you see, is that all workers are trying to load data into the same table, but different partitions and workers holds the table lock. This may block other workers.

  There is a 'fix' for this, but there is a minimum difficulty. Data pump sill cannot load into several partitions, remember to remove the table lock, but instead, only 1 partitoin/subpartitoin will be set to 1. You will not see the parallel max used in these cases, but you will not see other workers waiting for an exclusive lock on the same table.

  I do not remember the number of patch and I do not remember what version it went in, but Oracle Support should be able to help with that.

  If the same Data Pump task creates the tables, or if these tables are not partitioned/sous-partitionnée, then I have not heard of this issue.

  Thank you

  Dean

• Analyze tables after creating indexes

  Hi all
  
  I created new clues on the production environment, we must analyze tables after creating indexes. Why and what analysis do?
  
  Thanks for the help.
  

  Select * from V$version;
  
  Oracle Database 10g Enterprise Edition Release 10.2.0.4.0 - 64bi
  PL/SQL Release 10.2.0.4.0 - Production
  "CORE     10.2.0.4.0     Production"
  TNS for HPUX: Version 10.2.0.4.0 - Production
  NLSRTL Version 10.2.0.4.0 - Production

  There are so many different options and you'll certainly want to tweak your stats based on your system.
  The best thing to do is to read about dbms_stats:
  http://download.Oracle.com/docs/CD/B19306_01/server.102/b14211/stats.htm#PFGRF30102
  http://download.Oracle.com/docs/CD/B19306_01/AppDev.102/b14258/d_stats.htm#CIHEHDFB

  Here are a few examples to give you an idea of what they look like and how to perform:

  BEGIN
    DBMS_STATS.GATHER_TABLE_STATS(OWNNAME          => 'schema_name',
                                  TABNAME          => 'table_name',
                                  ESTIMATE_PERCENT => DBMS_STATS.AUTO_SAMPLE_SIZE, --> For really big tables oracle can just do a specific percent
                                  METHOD_OPT       => 'for all columns size 1', --> Defines Histograms, size one disables histograms
                                  DEGREE           => 12, --> The degree of parallelism so you'll see 12 parallel threads gathering stats
                                  CASCADE          => TRUE); --> gather stats on the table's indexes also
  END; 
  
  BEGIN
    DBMS_STATS.GATHER_INDEX_STATS(OWNNAME          => 'schema_name',
                                  INDNAME          => 'index_name',
                                  ESTIMATE_PERCENT => 50,
                                  DEGREE           => 4);
  END; 
  

  You can also do

  DBMS_STATS.gather_schema_stats
  DBMS_STATS.gather_database_stats

  and much more...

  I really want to focus on the need to do your homework on them,
  read the docs I linked and adjust your statistical parameters to fit your db objects and how they are accessed/used.
  Having accurate and meaningful statistics are very important to the performance of the database.

• ALTER INDEX REBUILD and large waste area

  Hello world.
  
  Concerns the RDBMS EE 10.2.0.2 on a box with 16CPUs. Non-standard initialization parameters:
  
  db_16k_cache_size = 3G
  pga_aggregate_target = 3G
  SGA_MAX_SIZE = 12G
  SGA_TARGET = 5G
  workarea_size_policy = AUTO
  
  I have a large table partitioned on a monthly basis with a local couple of bitmap index on this subject. Table and index are stored in different areas of storage. The index tablespace is
  
  EXTENT MANAGEMENT UNIFORM LOCAL 1 M SIZE
  16K BLOCKSIZE
  SEGMENT SPACE MANAGEMENT AUTO
  
  Nightly batch processing allows a few partitions index unusable then inserts/adds one part of the data and rebuilds the index with
  
  ALTER INDEX... REBUILD PARTITION... NOLOGGING PARALLEL
  
  When you are finished, query on DBA_IND_PARTITIONS shows that, for all the index, partition value SCOPES is much greater than the value of used BYTES, for example one of the partitions has 106 DEGREES (1 MB each so he made 106 MB space) while only 15 MB for the BYTES.
  
  I understand that during the reconstruction of the parallel process slave create segments in the tablespace of the index of destination so that spend a lot more space than this segment takes finally. But it also means that the space is not released. (Deallocation/shrinkage will not help). Same thing can be demonstrated by the queries on DBA_SEGMENTS and DBA_FREE_SPACE. Because of this behavior, I have huge waste of space in the tablespace to index.
  
  Can someone help, please?
  Przemek
  
  Allocate space for parallel process slave is documented in the book 'Data warehousing database Oracle 10 g 2', chapter 25 "run in parallel to assistance.

  user2038804 wrote:
  Concerns the RDBMS EE 10.2.0.2 on a box with 16CPUs. Non-standard initialization parameters:

  When you are finished, query on DBA_IND_PARTITIONS shows that, for all the index, partition value SCOPES is much greater than the value of used BYTES, for example one of the partitions has 106 DEGREES (1 MB each so he made 106 MB space) while only 15 MB for the BYTES.

  Przemek,

  I can confirm that there is a bug in 10.2.0.2 leading to inconsistent information related to size in DBA_SEGMENTS / DBA_EXTENTS after an index rebuild in parallel to a big clue, maybe a bug 4771672 in 10.2.0.3. If I remember correctly the information of MEASUREMENT is correct and the information provided in DBA_SEGMENTS is misleading.

  The Metalink note suggests to use DBMS_SPACE_ADMIN Procedure TABLESPACE_FIX_SEGMENT_EXTBLKS to correct erroneous information in the dictionary, but I don't know if it was the one we used when encountering the problem.

  Kind regards
  Randolf

  Oracle related blog stuff:
  http://Oracle-Randolf.blogspot.com/

  SQLTools ++ for Oracle (Open source Oracle GUI for Windows):
  http://www.sqltools-plusplus.org:7676 /.
  http://sourceforge.NET/projects/SQLT-pp/

• How can I insert a number to a specific index (row and column) to a table

  I had the most with function 'insert into array' problem because of its counter-intuitiveness. I want to insert a number I got inside a loop IN a table. The ROW and COLUMN of this table I want enter the number is specified by the number of loops of two loops FOR. It did not work.

  So, I have isolated and tested this function further. Frankly, I initialized a table 2D with ZEROS and plugged into the "insert into array" function (on top of entry). I then put the number '1' for the index (line) and the number "2" for the index (column) and then put the entry number "6" for the "new item/sub-table. Then, I hung a picture of 2-D (indicator) output to the output of the function "insert into array. When I did all that, it means I want to just put the number '6' in line '1' and the column '2'... This isn't letting me do it.

  How can I do this SIMPLE?

  Hi Darrell h...,

  Looks like you can use the function "autoindexing. Take your value and connect it to your loop, it will be a default autoindexing. Right-click on the last tunnel of output and select Create indicator, the result is your table.

  It will be useful.

  Mike

• Creating indexes for the table

  can someone help me how to create indexes in the table. I m creating own table... I need to select a particular field in the table. So I need to calculate the index position. I use my code like this,

  This will returnthe number of columns in the table.

  Class array

  {

  private int Table_Index()
  {
  for (int x = 0; x)<>
  {
  table_index = x;
  }
  Return table_index;
  }

  }

  MainClass can I get this length of Index

  Table T1;

  int t1 is T1. Table_Index();

  This property returns my length (4) of table column

  Using this index (t1) I HAV to see what position I'm at table now...

  someone help me...

  You can use a listfield, he supports methods to get the selected row and its contents.

• CREATE INDEXES online is waiting for the TX = 4 mode

  Hello

  I have a strange blocking problem where an INDEX CREATE LINE is waiting for a transaction that did only inserted a line in the parent table.

  Wait is mode TX = 4 (not TM locks) and I currently have it reproduced only on 11.2.0.3 and 11.2.0.4

  Easy to replicate the schema SCOTT:

  Session 1:

  SQL > set time on

  14:54:58 SQL > insert into SCOTT. Dept (DEPTNO, dname) values (50, 'test');

  1 line of creation.

  Session 2;

  14:55:24 SQL > create index test on SCOTT. EMP (ename) online;

  It's waiting ' enq: TX - line lock conflict ":"

  SQL > select sid, chain_signature from v$ wait_chains where blocker_is_valid = 'TRUE '.

  SID CHAIN_SIGNATURE

  ---------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------

  603 ' SQL * Net client message' < ='enq: TX - line lock conflict '

  While waiting to acquire the lock of transaction in mode 4:

  SQL > select * lock gv$ where sid = 603

  INST_ID SELECT ADDR KADDR SID TYPE ID1 ID2 LMODE CTIME BLOCK REQUEST

  ---------- ---------------- ---------------- ---------- ---- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------

  1 00000006CDA05EB8 00000006CDA05F10 603 352577 0 4 0 348 2 AE

  1 00000006CDA06078 00000006CDA060D0 603 DL 779505 0 3 0 308 2

  1 00000006CD9FABE0 00000006CD9FAC38 603 DL 779505 0 3 0 308 2

  1 00007F28001F5028 00007F28001F5088 603 779505 0 2 0 308 2 TM

  1 00007F28001F5028 00007F28001F5088 603 779510 0 4 0 308 2 TM

  1 00000006CD9FA240 00000006CD9FA298 603 779505 0 4 0 308 2 OD

  1 00000006B4F26790 00000006B4F26808 589847 711499 6 0 308 2 TX 603

  1 00000006CDA0ED68 00000006CDA0EDC0 655377 996169 0 4 308 TX 603 0

  I've traced 10046 and 10704:

  broadcast message = obj 29231196672 #= 779514 tim = 1447251053634045

  ksqgtl * mode TX-000f001e-000ad97c = 4 flags = 0 x 10001 timeout = 21474836 *.

  ksqgtl: xcb = 0x6bb322528, ktcdix = 2147483647, topxcb = 0x6bb322528

  ktcipt (topxcb) = 0 x 0

  ksucti: init logon has of txn DID:

  ksqgtl:

  ksqlkdid: 0001-003F-0000AFC4

  ksudidTrace: ksqgtl

  ktcmydid(): 0001-003F-0000AFC4

  ksusesdi: 0001-003F-0000AFC3

  ksusetxn: 0001-003F-0000AFC4

  ksqcmi: TX, f001e, ad97c mode = 4 timeout = 21474836

  2015-11-11 15:11:36.566

  WAITING #140700792578680: nam ='enq: TX - line lock conflict ' ela 42932082 name = | mode = 1415053316 usn < < 16 | location = sequence 983070 = obj 711036 #= 779514 tim = 1447251096566283

  And there is nothing in V$ SESSION leader/block/line current. class obj # is EMP. current sql_id is the CREATE INDEX.

  If anyone has an idea on:

  -Why creating an index in line must wait for transactions that modified only parent table

  -How to continue the investigation

  -can or cannot reproduce in other versions

  Thanks in advance,

  Franck.

  I guess you have a constraint foreign key between emp and Dept.

  It's expected behaviours: since 11.1 any DML at one end of a referential integrity constraint translates into a mode lock 3 taken at the other end, and your phenomenon resembles a side effect of this.

  When you try to create the index online that your session must assume that the other session (holding mode 3 on the emp and dept) may have changed the emp and dept, so it must wait for the session to the commit or rollback.

  (I guess that in principle, he could walk the cancellation of the transaction see if EMP had in fact been changed - but maybe who was considered too complicated to be worth the risk to implement)

  Concerning

  Jonathan Lewis

  Updated - I just did a quick check to reproduce the effect on 11.1.0.7

  For reference - here are a few notes on modes of locking and how the application has changed over time: https://jonathanlewis.wordpress.com/2010/06/21/locks/

• Why I can't create indexes on the table of RDF data

  When I tried to create indexes on the table of RDF data, it always say the table or view does not exist. I created the RDF model using java codes:

  Oracle Oracle = new Oracle ("jdbc:oracle:thin:@localhost:1521:orcl", "system", "123");

  Chart GraphOracleSem = new GraphOracleSem (oracle, "test2");

  
  

  And used the following commands in sqlplus to create indexes:

  SQL >

  SELECT THE SEPARATE OWNER, OBJECT_NAME

  FROM DBA_OBJECTS

  WHERE TYPE_OBJET = 'TABLE '.

  4. AND OBJECT_NAME like ' % TEST2;

  OWNER

  --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  OBJECT_NAME

  --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  SYSTEM

  TEST2_NS

  SYSTEM

  RDFB_TEST2

  SYSTEM

  TEST2_TPL

  OWNER

  --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  OBJECT_NAME

  --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  SYSTEM

  RDFC_TEST2

  
  

  SQL > connect as sysdba

  Enter the password:

  Connected.

  SQL >

  SQL >

  SQL > select * from TEST2_TPL;

  Select * from TEST2_TPL

  *

  ERROR on line 1:

  ORA-00942: table or view does not exist

  SQL > CREATE INDEX test2_sub_idx ON TEST2_TPL (triple. GET_SUBJECT());

  CREATE INDEX test2_sub_idx ON TEST2_TPL (triple. GET_SUBJECT())

  *

  ERROR on line 1:

  ORA-00942: table or view does not exist

  Hi Shifu,

  It is not recommended to use the SYS or SYSTEM to store/manage schema graph RDF data.

  Can you please try the following in a SQL * more terminal?

  SQL > conn system/eu1

  Connected.

  SQL >

  SQL >

  SQL > create user graphuser identified by graphuser;

  Created by the user.

  SQL > grant connect, resources, unlimited tablespace to graphuser;

  Grant succeeded.

  SQL > conn graphuser/graphuser

  Connected.

  SQL > create table graph_tpl (triple sdo_rdf_triple_s) compress;

  Table created.

  SQL > sem_apis.create_sem_model exec ('graphic', 'graph_tpl', 'three');

  PL/SQL procedure successfully completed.

  SQL > insert into graph_tpl values (sdo_rdf_triple_s ('graph', '', '', ''));

  1 line of creation.

  SQL > select count (1) in the mdsys.rdfm_graph;

  1

  You see the same result?

  Thank you

  Zhe Wu

• create indexes on the upper part of the column - reminders function is not deterministic

  Hi all

  I'm having a problem on a database. When you create an index on an existing table on the upper part of a column, Oracle triggers an ORA-30553. I've done this 40 index other databases, with the same and different versions, without problem. When you create the index on a copy of the table, it is created with success...

  Here is the code:

  SQL > select * from v version $;

  BANNER

  --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  Oracle Database 11 g Release 11.2.0.3.0 - 64 bit Production

  PL/SQL Release 11.2.0.3.0 - Production

  CORE Production 11.2.0.3.0

  AMT for 64-bit Windows: Version 11.2.0.3.0 - Production

  NLSRTL Version 11.2.0.3.0 - Production

  SQL > CREATE INDEX IDX_SRE_E_MAIL_UPPER on fsynrelatie (upper (sre_e_mail)) tablespace idx;

  CREATE the INDEX IDX_SRE_E_MAIL_UPPER on idx tablespace fsynrelatie (upper (sre_e_mail))

  *

  ERROR on line 1:

  ORA-30553: the function is not deterministic

  SQL > create table fsynrelatie2 in select * from fsynrelatie;

  Table created.

  SQL > CREATE INDEX IDX_SRE_E_MAIL_UPPER on fsynrelatie2 (upper (sre_e_mail)) tablespace idx;

  The index is created.

  SQL > drop table fsynrelatie2;

  Deleted table.

  SQL > show parameter query_rewrite_enabled

  VALUE OF TYPE NAME

  ------------------------------------ ----------- ------------------------------

  query_rewrite_enabled string TRUE

  Hi all

  Thank you for the answers. I found the problem:

  On the table, there are 54 index:

  Select index_type, uniqueness, count (*) from user_indexes where table_name = 'FSYNRELATIE '.

  Index_type group, uniqueness

  INDEX_TYPE	SINGLE CHARACTER	COUNT (*)
  FIELD	ARE NOT UNIQUE	1
  BASED ON A NORMAL FUNCTION	ARE NOT UNIQUE	4
  NORMAL	UNIQUE	3
  NORMAL	ARE NOT UNIQUE	46

  3 unique indexes are the primary key and 2 another witch number field contains unique identifiers for rows in other systems. The domain index is an index of Oracle text on a couple of fields. There are 3 indices of function based on a high on a field and 1 on an individual function. This last clue has caused the problem. Apparently, on the creation, this function is deterministic, but when rolling a new version of the software. It became a non-deterministic function. When I delete the index, my original index on upper (sre_e_mail) has been created successfully! Now, I did the deterministic function again and could recreate the function without problem.

  Thanks for your comments!