Local/Global index for OLTP

Similar Questions

• Compress for oltp index

  Hello
  
  Try to use the syntax belo oracle 11.2.0.3 compressor sfor oltp index creation
  
  can do on fine table
  
  RNAGE-hash partitioned table
  
  can use the compress for oltp fine on table - it is not availabvle to index
  
  Tried it under
  
  create indexes RTRN_PF_RUN_NUM_IDX5 on parallel compress local RETAILER_TRANSACTION_COMP_por (PF_RUN_NUM) for oltp;
  
  line described o.k.
  create indexes RTRN_PF_RUN_NUM_IDX5 on parallel compress local RETAILER_TRANSACTION_COMP_por (PF_RUN_NUM);
  
  
  What I am doing wrong?
  
  Thaks

  Size of the index and growth depends on the growth of the table. If you use "compress for OLTP' for not table indexes.

• Check the local or global index

  Hi all
  I wanted to know how we confirm/check if an index is local or global on a system of oracle 10 g 2
  
  Thank you
  Rossy.Rocs

  Lacotte,

  Small correction was need here that the partitioned dba_indexes column will only be "indicates whether the index is partitioned (YES) or not (NO); While op asks how do I know if it is a local or global index. So for that he must check the below command:

  SELECT INDEX_NAME, THE LOCALITY OF USER_PART_INDEXES;

  Column of the locality of user_part_indexes ' indicates if the partitioned index is local (LOCAL) or global (GLOBAL).
  http://download.Oracle.com/docs/CD/B19306_01/server.102/b14237/statviews_2015.htm#REFRN20156

  Concerning
  Girish Sharma

• Local and Global Index confusion...

  Hi all

  Oracle Database 10 g Enterprise Edition Release 10.2.0.3.0 - 64 bit

  I have a partitioned table, when developing the application, they have committed an index ON this table. Previously, whenever we use to run 'Alter Table add partition..' global index becomes unusable and I used to rebuild the same. But in recent months, each time we add partition (Alter Table... ADD Partition..) on this table, index will get unusable to stat instead it shows that indexes THE data dictionaries (Lacality = Local in USER_PART_INDEXES). Partitioned indexes are also automatically created with each table partition creation.

  But the query below shows the output indexes are GLOBAL.

  Select double dbms_metadata.get_ddl('INDEX','ABCD','USER_A');

  Can someone me help on what actually happened here.

  But the example above has the keyword LOCAL?

  CREATING INDEX 'SEB '. "" CDRV_I1 ""SEBS ". "" CDRV ' ('CDRV_CURNT_FL', 'IND_LAST_VERSN', 'GMT_SEIZ_DT_TIME', 'CLECT_ZONE', 'CALL_ID',

  "SWTCH_ADMIN_ABBR")

  PCTFREE, INITRANS 10 2 MAXTRANS 255 LOGGING

  STORAGE (INITIAL 10485760 NEXT 10485760 MINEXTENTS 2 MAXEXTENTS 2147483645)

  PCTINCREASE 0 DEFAULT USER_TABLES)

  "SEBS_CDRV_TAB" of LOCAL TABLESPACE

  (PARTITION "CDRV_HISTORIC"

  PCTFREE, INITRANS 10 2 MAXTRANS 255

  STORAGE (INITIAL 10485760 NEXT 10485760 MINEXTENTS 2 MAXEXTENTS 2147483645)

  PCTINCREASE 0 FREELISTS 1 FREELIST GROUPS 1 DEFAULT USER_TABLES)

  TABLESPACE "SEBS_CDRV_TAB."

  If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it is very probably a duck (or the local index)

  See you soon

  Richard Foote

  http://richardfoote.WordPress.com/

• conversion index global index local

  Hello guys, someone tell me how to convert a global index of a local index.
  The only method I know is to
  1 remove the global index
  2. create the index even with the local keyword.
  
  I was wondering is there any alter index statement which allows you to change the overall index to a local index?
  
  Thank you

  969224 wrote:
  Hello guys, someone tell me how to convert a global index of a local index.
  The only method I know is to
  1 remove the global index
  2. create the index even with the local keyword.

  I was wondering is there any alter index statement which allows you to change the overall index to a local index?

  Thank you

  There is no such statement

• Global index unpartitioned reconstruction shot

  Hi all.

  The rebuild operation global index unpartitioned is hang. Everything down and rebuild this index works correctly (nearly 15-20 secconds).

  Format of the operation:

  ALTER index index-name regeneration;

  Also try

  ALTER index index-name reconstruction nologging;

  Also try

  ALTER index index-name parallel reconstruction n NOLOGGING;

  Trace session has failed the cause of blocking.

  Session block on the operation "sequential reading.

  No other sessions are in time to rebuild indexes, without locks, no session blocking.

  Plan query ranks Rowsource Time (s)

  CREATE the INDEX STATEMENT cost = 1344867		0
  CREATE the INDEX STATEMENT cost = 1344867		0
  CREATE the INDEX STATEMENT cost = 1344867		0
  CREATE the INDEX STATEMENT cost = 1344867		0
  UNIQUE CONSTRUCTION INDEX NO AGG_EXT_ARPU_MOU_IDX		8
  UNIQUE CONSTRUCTION INDEX NO AGG_EXT_ARPU_MOU_IDX		8
  UNIQUE CONSTRUCTION INDEX NO AGG_EXT_ARPU_MOU_IDX		8
  UNIQUE CONSTRUCTION INDEX NO AGG_EXT_ARPU_MOU_IDX		8
  LIKE CREATE INDEX	13 M	9
  LIKE CREATE INDEX	13 M	9
  LIKE CREATE INDEX	13 M	9
  LIKE CREATE INDEX	13 M	9
  INDEX FULL SCAN AGG_EXT_ARPU_MOU_IDX		22
  INDEX FULL SCAN AGG_EXT_ARPU_MOU_IDX		22
  INDEX FULL SCAN AGG_EXT_ARPU_MOU_IDX		22
  INDEX FULL SCAN AGG_EXT_ARPU_MOU_IDX		22

  EVENT                            P1      P2           P3

  db file sequential read

  1

  21000

  1

  
  

  Partitioned table consists of about 13 million lines.

  Can you help me find the problem or give a workaround solution.

  Kind regards

  Mikhail

  Always go read a CREATE INDEX of the Table.

  An INDEX REBUILD will be:

  (a) if the Index is in a VALID State-read of the Index online

  (b) if the Index is unusable-online read the Table

  You could make the Index UNUSABLE to force RECONSTRUCTION to read from the Table.

  I assume that you do NOT attempt a reconstruction in LINE and are ready to have the table locked for the duration of the reconstruction.

  But WHY YOU REBUILD the INDEX?  What is the reason?   Do you have proof that reconstruction will benefit?

  Hemant K Collette

• Debug log 5 Apex: "cannot find index for the item.

  I just spotted some strange output in the debug log in an application built in 4.0, still, using this mode of compatibility, now in 5.0.1

  

  Some error messages for crawlers

  Fetch application meta data
  can not find index for component (3,15469335749905175)
  can not find region index for region #15469335749905175 when trying to add (1,15481314906419581) - it must be excluded because of REQUIRED_PATCH
  

  Can anyone advise me on what it means? Or what other information of interest?

  Nothing seems to be a problem with the page. The specified region is extremely basic html with a compilation option that is excluded. Other regions with the same compilation option do not report these log files in the debug.

  Scott.

  Hi Scott,.

  It is indeed related to the build option and you can ignore the messages. I'll put their debug level 9 If you don't see them in the normal debug output.

  Before the page is rendered, APEX load relevant metadata in the wwv_flow package global variables. For example, fill us the tables g_items, the g_buttons and the g_plugs with the definitions of element, button and region, respectively. We do not charge the definitions of components that are excluded by a compilation option. After loading these data, we must build relationships between records, for example, we calculate index of the item in the g_plugs region and store it with the definition of the element. If the region is excluded by a compiler option, but the underlying element is not, the computation of the element cannot find the related region folder in g_plugs. You get messages from debugging for this kind of inconsistencies.

  Kind regards

  Christian

• with no prefixes local prefix index a huge difference

  Hello world
  
  I have a little problem on the partitioning and I didn't understand why. Here is my scenario:
  
  I created a partitioned table, partition is a date column range partition ona, then I created 2 index a prefix, a non pre-fixed and both of them is local. When I run a query based on the partition column and another (that I've indexed) execution plans are really different. as an example:
  
  

    CREATE TABLE PART_HAREKET_TABLE (
      ISLEM_TAR DATE, -- MY PARTITION COLUMN
      ISLEM_REF VARCHAR2(10), -- INDEX COLUMN
      ... -- OTHER COLUMNS HERE
    );
    
  -- load data to the table from one of my prod table...
  
    CREATE INDEX I_PART_HAREKET_1 ON PART_HAREKET_TABLE(ISLEM_TAR, ISLEM_REF) LOCAL;
    
    CREATE INDEX I_PART_HAREKET_2 ON PART_HAREKET_TABLE(ISLEM_REF) LOCAL;
    
    EXEC DBMS_STATS.GATHER_TABLE_STATS(USER, 'PART_HAREKET_TABLE', ESTIMATE_PERCENT => 100, CASCADE => TRUE);

  After this, I run these queries:
  

    EXPLAIN PLAN FOR
    select /*+ INDEX(PART_HAREKET_TABLE, I_PART_HAREKET_1 ) */ * 
    from   part_hareket_table 
    where islem_tar = to_Date('22/01/2012','dd/mm/yyyy') and islem_ref like 'KN%';
  
  execution plan:
  
  -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  | Id  | Operation                          | Name               | Rows  | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     | Pstart| Pstop |
  -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  |   0 | SELECT STATEMENT                   |                    |  1243 |   195K|    19   (0)| 00:00:01 |       |       |
  |   1 |  PARTITION RANGE SINGLE            |                    |  1243 |   195K|    19   (0)| 00:00:01 |    62 |    62 |
  |   2 |   TABLE ACCESS BY LOCAL INDEX ROWID| PART_HAREKET_TABLE |  1243 |   195K|    19   (0)| 00:00:01 |    62 |    62 |
  |*  3 |    INDEX RANGE SCAN                | I_PART_HAREKET_1   |  1243 |       |     5   (0)| 00:00:01 |    62 |    62 |
  -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   
  Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
  ---------------------------------------------------
   
     3 - access("ISLEM_TAR"=TO_DATE(' 2012-01-22 00:00:00', 'syyyy-mm-dd hh24:mi:ss') AND "ISLEM_REF" LIKE 'KN%')
         filter("ISLEM_REF" LIKE 'KN%')

  It is a good cost I think also as predicate info I see ISLEM_TAR and ISLEM_REF.
  
  When I use this:
  

    EXPLAIN PLAN FOR
    select /*+ INDEX(PART_HAREKET_TABLE, I_PART_HAREKET_2 ) */ * 
    from   part_hareket_table 
    where islem_tar = to_Date('22/01/2012','dd/mm/yyyy') and islem_ref like 'KN%';
  
  -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  | Id  | Operation                          | Name               | Rows  | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     | Pstart| Pstop |
  -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  |   0 | SELECT STATEMENT                   |                    |  1243 |   195K|  8209   (1)| 00:01:55 |       |       |
  |   1 |  PARTITION RANGE SINGLE            |                    |  1243 |   195K|  8209   (1)| 00:01:55 |    62 |    62 |
  |*  2 |   TABLE ACCESS BY LOCAL INDEX ROWID| PART_HAREKET_TABLE |  1243 |   195K|  8209   (1)| 00:01:55 |    62 |    62 |
  |*  3 |    INDEX RANGE SCAN                | I_PART_HAREKET_2   |   141K|       |   218   (1)| 00:00:04 |    62 |    62 |
  -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   
  Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
  ---------------------------------------------------
   
     2 - filter("ISLEM_TAR"=TO_DATE(' 2012-01-22 00:00:00', 'syyyy-mm-dd hh24:mi:ss'))
     3 - access("ISLEM_REF" LIKE 'KN%')
         filter("ISLEM_REF" LIKE 'KN%')

  as you can see here, there is a huge cost difference and ISLEM_TAR (partitioned column) is also used as a filter not access. These indices are LOCAL
  
  so I expect that second index (non-prefixed) would be more effective. because oracle already know which partition which must be read and this index is smaller (just a column a) so I thought, Oracle will find appropriate part partition index and will read just this score (for the index and table) thus rows.
  
  even the time of the request are different, first we (prefix) brings data ms 0.031, second 0.375ms (no prefixes).
  
  but it's not? what Miss me?
  
  You may say that ' AS' operator cause than on the ISLEM_REF column. I also use it as equal "=",
  for the first query costs 4, for a second, now cost 8. 2 again...
  
  the partition size is approximately 440 MB
  
  an example of similer is also here exist: index Local: prefix or no prefix
  
  Jonathan Lewis made an example and it works very well...
  
  My db:

  Oracle Database 11g Enterprise Edition Release 11.2.0.2.0 - 64bit Production
  PL/SQL Release 11.2.0.2.0 - Production
  "CORE     11.2.0.2.0     Production"
  TNS for IBM/AIX RISC System/6000: Version 11.2.0.2.0 - Production
  NLSRTL Version 11.2.0.2.0 - Production

  find the appropriate index part partition

  Who is 62 of Partition of Index in both cases.

  In both cases, there is a one-to-one correspondence between the partition table and the index partition.

  However, in the second case, he expects to have to browse through the index entries 141thousand against only 1243 index entries in the first case. Oracle expects to have to read several index blocks in the second case.

  I guess your partitions are per month and not per day. So an index that is located on ISLEM_TAR + ISLEM_REF of columns is a more 'fine' (i.e. more accurate) because it only reads the entries for that one day of the index.
  In the second case, Oracle expects that it returns rowid for several days (which means more ROWID returned from the index) and will filter the lines that do not match the date target when he reads the table. You'll notice that the use of the second filter on date against the table - read more lines of the table (because more ROWID is returned by the index).

  Hemant K Collette

  Published by: Hemant K Collette on 10 July 2012 15:17
  --Added clarification that 'fine' are "more accurate".

• Local partitioned indexes

  Hi all
  
  I created 2 local partitioned index. The indexes are indexes of function. the table size is 2.3 T.
  I created the first clue that it took 14 hours to create, and even to analyze and it works fine now. Then, I created second index. But now it does not.
  What should I do?
  
  version 11.1.0.6
  RAC, ASM
  
  Thanks in advance
  
  Published by: disaster on April 10, 2011 21:43
  
  Published by: disaster on April 10, 2011 21:51

  Dear Sir

  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  | Id  | Operation              | Name         | Starts | E-Rows | A-Rows |   A-Time   | Buffers | Reads  |
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  |   1 |  PARTITION RANGE SINGLE|              |      1 |      1 |     82 |00:03:37.92 |     534K|    534K|
  |*  2 |   TABLE ACCESS FULL    | TBL          |      1 |      1 |     82 |00:03:37.92 |     534K|    534K|
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  

  It is the plan of the real explanation followed by the SQL engine to run your query

  The Oracle optimizer is the estimate (based on the statistics that you have collected about index and table) that your query will return only 1 rank (E-lines = 1) while in reality (when the query has been executed) it's return of 82 lines (A-Rows = 82) within 3 minutes and 37 seconds (A-Time = 00:03:37.92)

  It is clear that your index function that is not used.

  You should be aware that when you create a function based index, oracle will create a virtual column that is hidden behind the scene.

  Try to gather statistics on this column using dbms_stats.

  Please, try first to TEST

  BEGIN
     DBMS_STATS.gather_table_stats
                   (ownname             => user,
                    tabname             => 'TBL',
                    CASCADE             => TRUE,
                    method_opt         => 'FOR ALL HIDDEN COLUMNS SIZE 1'
                           );
  END;
  /
  

  and re - run your query and post once again the new plan explain him like you did before

  Best regards

  Mohamed Houri

• Local Bitmap Index confusion

  Hello
  I use Oracle 10.2.0.3.0 on Solaris 5.10.
  
  I have a range based to 60 partitions partition table. It is a fact table. I load the data for 60 days in this table. I created a partition for each day, and the partition key is the column date. I've created the table with the partition, but does not create the local bitmap index on the partition keys $vdate, because as far as I know oracle makes the local bitmap index unusable before insert you and then to rebuild it after the charge. Is this fair?
  
  So the best strategy is first load the data in the partition, and then create a local on this partition, is bitmap index - this exact?
  
  For example, in the future, some lines get inserted into an existing partition where the local bitmap index is present, then I should still once rebuild the index on that partition, as in the case of insertion Oracle would have it turned off?
  
  
  In this table, it has a vactivity column that is a foreign key to a dimension. Several queries use this column here where clause. I also want to create an index of bitmap on this column? On this not partitioned key column, the local bitmap index should be created. Is this fair?
  
  Please also suggest as which is faster, a local bitmap index rebuild after making it unusable, or the deletion and recreation it?
  
  Thank you and best regards

  If you insert only a few lines, you don't need to score the unusable bitmap index partition. The insert will not fail.

  However, if you perform a bulk insert several lines, it would be desirable mark it unusable and rebuild after insertion.

  You can certainly create an index on the column of the FK.

  Hemant K Collette

• Error: The application-specific permission settings grant Local Activation permission for the COM server application in the Windows XP computer.

  Original title: DCOM {E9F9ED00-7705-101B-9802-0000C07B665C}.

  I have this message DCOM in the registry: "the application-specific permission settings do not grant Local Activation permission for the COM with CLSID {E9F9ED00-7705-101B-9802-0000C07B665C} server application the user... xxxx...". (I deliberately placed the "xxxx" instead of my current PC for security reasons). This security permission can be modified using the Component Services administrative tool." I tried to look through the forum here, and I found elements that were close and others are not. so if anyone knows where I can go make the adjustments, it could save our society approximately $10K, because my new bosses are ready to install all new hardware and software, but if we could find a much simpler approach to this problem, this would make the new kid on the block like a champ look.
  We have a Window XP, the flat touch screen PC, running a few packages of software reviews that keep a record of our SCADA system trend.

  At random times around the clock, the PC will just restart and return to the logon screen. There is no other necessary users, so we have only the journal administrator form. As soon as we open the administrator it is specially configured to run a specific program of our choice, but if the PC keeps restarting whenever it feels like it, there is no history chart tend to save. It is essential, that we need.

  Hello

  Your Windows XP question is more complex than what is generally answered in the Microsoft Answers forums. It is better suited for the IT Pro TechNet public. Please post your question in the forum TechNet for assistance:

  http://social.technet.Microsoft.com/forums/en/itproxpsp/threads

  Hope the helps of information.

• How or there is no model code keep update/sync the local database indexedDB for MySQL database online?

  How or there is no model code keep update/sync the local database indexedDB for MySQL database online?

  Unfortunately there is no direct connector for an application of WebWorks to a back-end database. You will need to do, is to have some middleware web server (Apache, Node.js, etc.) who manages a web service that you can make an HTTP request to and GET, POST, UPDATE, DELETE data. Middleware and then transmits commands to the back-end database and returns the results to the finished device.

• How to print an index for a directory?

  original title: print the directory

  How to print an index for a directory?  At home I run Windows 7, but I really want to do this at work - OS is Vista Business

  You mean "how to print a list of the directories?
  http://www.Google.com/search?q=how+do+I+print+a+directory+listing

  How to add the feature print directory for files in Windows XP, Windows Vista, in Windows 7
  http://support.Microsoft.com/kb/321379

  HTH

• Event ID 10016 - the application-specific permission settings do not local Activation permission for the COM with the CLSID server application

  Lately, I'm getting this system error a lot now that I've upgraded to Windows 8 Pro is an event DistributedCom 10016 ID. Here is the text of the error:

  The application-specific permission settings do not local Activation permission for the COM with the CLSID server application

  {D63B10C5-BB46-4990-A94F-E40B9D520160}

  and APPID

  {9CA88EE3-ACB7-47C8-AFC4-AB702511C276}

  the user NT AUTHORITY\SYSTEM SID (S-1-5-18) from the address LocalHost (using LRPC) running in the container of the application unavailable SID (not available). This security permission can be modified using the Component Services administrative tool.

  Anyone has an idea why I get this error?
  Walt

  Same thing here. Grayed. Windows 8.1 seems to fill the observer of events with many more errors than previous versions.

  Edit: OK, discovered why it is grayed out. There are 2 reg key, you must set permissions before going to the Configuration of DCOM in component services. The CLSID key and the APPID key.

  From another forum, although it applies to a different application, same principle:

  1. open Regedit.
  2. go in HKEY_Classes_Root\CLSID\ * CLSID *.
  Note: * CLSID * stand for the ID that appears in your event viewer error. In your case, it is {C2F03A33-21F5-47FA-B4BB-156362A2F239}.
  3. right-click on it and select authorization.
  4. click on Advance and change owner to administrator. Also click on the box that will appear below the threshold of owner.
  5. apply a full control.
  6. close the tab, then go to HKEY_LocalMachine\Software\Classes\AppID\ * APPID *.
  Note: * AppID * is the ID that appears in your event viewer. In your case, it is {316CDED5-E4AE-4B15-9113-7055D84DCC97}.
  7 right-click on it and select authorization.
  8. click on Advance and change the owner to administrators.
  9. click on the box that will appear below the line owner.
  10. click on apply and grant full control to the administrators.
  11. close all tabs and navigate to the administration tool.
  12. open component services.
  13. click on the computer, click my computer, and then click DCOM.
  14 find the corresponding service that appears on the display of the error.
  15. right-click on it, and then click Properties.
  16. click the Security tab, and then click Add a user. Add the SYSTEM and then apply.
  17. check enable local.

  Then use the relevant keys here and the DCOM Config utility should give you access greyed onareas:

  CLSID:
  
  {D63B10C5-BB46-4990-A94F-E40B9D520160}

  and APPID

  {9CA88EE3-ACB7-47C8-AFC4-AB702511C276}

• Select Insert on the same partition: RELATIONAL() - REMOVE a GLOBAL INDEX

  Hi all

  I found on v$ sqlarea suite statament:

  insert / * + / RELATIONAL PARALLEL ("TABLENAME") ("TABLENAME", 1) ADD NESTED_TABLE_SET_SETID NO_REF_CASCADE * /

  in "SCHEMA." "" TABLENAME ' partition ('DAY20151015')

  (

  Select / * + RELATIONAL("TABLENAME") PARALLEL("TABLENAME", 1) * /.

  *

  a 'schema '. " TABLENAME' partition ("DAY20151015") ".

  )

  Remove the global index

  This is a query that reads and writes the same data on the same partition!

  I think that it is generated by Oracle, but I don't undestand what he does.

  Can you give me some explanation or assistance on this query?

  Thank you very much

  This is a query that reads and writes the same data on the same partition!

  Well not - enough is NOT that.

  The RELATIONAL indicator causes unnest Oracle object data and insert the data from the attribute itself rather than the object.

  The indicators used are usable only by Oracle-c ' is why they are undocumented. You can find songs on the web, but practically everything you find is "best estimate".

  Oracle SQL tips - other indicators [HelloDBA.COM]