ROWID and data block

Hello
I'm using Orace 11 g R2 on Oracle Linux 64-bit 5.6
I have a simple question. ROWID contains: number of data, the number of file data object, * block * number, line number.
When he says data block, it doesn't mean Oracle this block or block of disk?
Thank you all.

Published by: Laus on June 3, 2013 04:16

Oracle block. The doc for dbms_rowid makes this clear, http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E11882_01/appdev.112/e25788/d_rowid.htm#CIHDGIGD
--
John Watson
Oracle Certified Master s/n
http://skillbuilders.com

Tags: Database

Similar Questions

Create a Multiple Signature and Date fields with a custom toolbar button

First of all, thank you in advance! I'm a newbie script and I trudged my way through with very little experience with the scripts of any kind. I'm good at taking and other scripts and them forming into something I need, but I can't seem to find something to do what I want.
Use Adobe Acrobat X, I am trying to create a button in toolbar that I can press to create several signature fields and date with predetermined places.
Here is the script that I have which strives to create a unique signature box, but I can't seem to understand the exact syntax to have this same button create several fields. In total, it's 9 signature fields and 9 date fields must be created. If you can give me just one example of what the button would look like with several scripts? I'm assuming that I put multiple variables, then in ownership cExec toolbar button that I could just scream all these variables?
var sigswm = "addField ('sigSWM', 'signature', '0', [108, 198, 494.64, 72])"
app.addToolButton ({cName: "dotbutton", cExec: sigswm, cLabel: "place Signature and Date blocks",});
Thanks in advance for any help you can provide.
Billy Sweeney

This is what works for me:

function addSignatureAndDateFields (doc) {}

Add a signature field and a date field

var swmsig = doc.addField ('sigSWM', 'signature', '0', [108, 198, 494.64, 72]);

swmsig.setAction ("MouseDown", "getField(\"dateSWM\").value = util.printd (\"mm/dd/yyyy\ ', Date() ");" ') new;

doc.addField ('dateSWM', 'text', '0', [162, 72, 234, 54]);

}

app.addToolButton({)

cName: "dotbutton."

cLabel: "place Signature and Date blocks."

cExec: "addSignatureAndDateFields (this)."

cEnable: ' event.rc = app.doc; "

cTooltext: "blocks of Signature and Date place.

});

CONVERSION of BITMAP OF ROWID and IFFS

Hello

A few days ago, I observed the strange behavior of a query that has counted the number of distinct attributes in a single partition of a large table. There is a local bitmap index on the specified column and I assumed that the request would not need to access the table information in the index. Indeed, the query has made an analysis of index full and no access table, but it took more time than I expected (more than 50 seconds in the given case). The sql, followed dbms_sqltune showed me, that most of the work has been associated with the BITMAP ROWID CONVERSION steps and a following GROUP BY of HASH. Then, I changed the query a little and got a much better performance without the BITMAP CONVERSION to ROWID and with a UNIQUE HASH - and operation with the same cost (and the same amount of LIOs). Here's a small suitcase of test 11.2.0.1 showing my remarks (on my Windows PC; "I've seen the effect in a Linux - 11.1.0.7 - data warehouse):

drop table t_partitioned;

create table t_partitioned (
    id  number
  , startdate date
  , col1 number
  , padding varchar2(50)
)
partition by range(startdate)
(
  partition t_partitioned_20120522 values less than (to_date('23.05.2012', 'dd.mm.yyyy'))
, partition t_partitioned_20120523 values less than (to_date('24.05.2012', 'dd.mm.yyyy'))
, partition t_partitioned_maxvalue values less than (maxvalue)
);

insert into t_partitioned
select rownum id
     , to_date('22.05.2012', 'dd.mm.yyyy') - 1 + trunc(rownum/500000) startdate
     , mod(rownum, 4) col1
     , lpad('*', 50, '*') padding
  from dual
connect by level <= 1000000;

-- executed several times until the table contained 64M rows, i.e. 32M for each day partition.
insert into t_partitioned
select * from t_partitioned;

commit;

create bitmap index t_partitioned_col1_start_bix on t_partitioned(col1, startdate) local;

exec dbms_stats.gather_table_stats(user, 't_partitioned')

And here are the queries and dbms_sqltune.report_sql_monitor information:

-- slow query
select /*+ monitor test 1 */ 
       count(distinct col1)
  from t_partitioned 
 where startdate = to_date('22.05.2012', 'dd.mm.yyyy');

-- fast query
select /*+ monitor test 2 */
       count(*)
  from (select distinct col1
          from t_partitioned
         where startdate = to_date('22.05.2012', 'dd.mm.yyyy'));

-- Test 1
SQL Monitoring Report

SQL Text
------------------------------
select /*+ monitor test 1 */ count(distinct col1) from t_partitioned where startdate = to_date('22.05.2012', 'dd.mm.yyyy')

Global Information
------------------------------
 Status              :  DONE (ALL ROWS)
 Instance ID         :  1
 Session             :  DBADMIN (67:178)
 SQL ID              :  3mxmz941azrgx
 SQL Execution ID    :  16777216
 Execution Started   :  05/22/2012 21:48:43
 First Refresh Time  :  05/22/2012 21:48:43
 Last Refresh Time   :  05/22/2012 21:48:47
 Duration            :  4s
 Module/Action       :  SQL*Plus/-
 Service             :  testdb
 Program             :  sqlplus.exe
 Fetch Calls         :  1

Global Stats
================================================================
| Elapsed |   Cpu   |    IO    | Fetch | Buffer | Read | Read  |
| Time(s) | Time(s) | Waits(s) | Calls |  Gets  | Reqs | Bytes |
================================================================
|    4.09 |    3.54 |     0.55 |     1 |   5868 |   62 |  46MB |
================================================================

SQL Plan Monitoring Details (Plan Hash Value=3761143426)
==================================================================================================================================================================================================
| Id |             Operation              |             Name             |  Rows   | Cost |   Time    | Start  | Execs |   Rows   | Read | Read  |  Mem  | Activity |      Activity Detail       |
|    |                                    |                              | (Estim) |      | Active(s) | Active |       | (Actual) | Reqs | Bytes | (Max) |   (%)    |        (# samples)         |
==================================================================================================================================================================================================
|  0 | SELECT STATEMENT                   |                              |         |      |         1 |     +4 |     1 |        1 |      |       |       |          |                            |
|  1 |   SORT AGGREGATE                   |                              |       1 |      |         1 |     +4 |     1 |        1 |      |       |       |          |                            |
|  2 |    VIEW                            | VW_DAG_0                     |    2602 | 5361 |         1 |     +4 |     1 |        4 |      |       |       |          |                            |
|  3 |     HASH GROUP BY                  |                              |    2602 | 5361 |         4 |     +1 |     1 |        4 |      |       |  840K |    50.00 | Cpu (2)                    |
|  4 |      PARTITION RANGE SINGLE        |                              |    2602 | 5360 |         3 |     +2 |     1 |      32M |      |       |       |          |                            |
|  5 |       BITMAP CONVERSION TO ROWIDS  |                              |    2602 | 5360 |         3 |     +2 |     1 |      32M |      |       |       |    25.00 | Cpu (1)                    |
|  6 |        BITMAP INDEX FAST FULL SCAN | T_PARTITIONED_COL1_START_BIX |         |      |         3 |     +2 |     1 |     5836 |   62 |  46MB |       |    25.00 | db file scattered read (1) |
==================================================================================================================================================================================================

-- Test 2
SQL Monitoring Report

SQL Text
------------------------------
select /*+ monitor test 2 */ count(*) from (select distinct col1 from t_partitioned where startdate = to_date('22.05.2012', 'dd.mm.yyyy'))

Global Information
------------------------------
 Status              :  DONE (ALL ROWS)
 Instance ID         :  1
 Session             :  DBADMIN (67:178)
 SQL ID              :  512z4htdq43cn
 SQL Execution ID    :  16777216
 Execution Started   :  05/22/2012 21:48:49
 First Refresh Time  :  05/22/2012 21:48:49
 Last Refresh Time   :  05/22/2012 21:48:49
 Duration            :  .019299s
 Module/Action       :  SQL*Plus/-
 Service             :  testdb
 Program             :  sqlplus.exe
 Fetch Calls         :  1

Global Stats
=================================================
| Elapsed |   Cpu   |  Other   | Fetch | Buffer |
| Time(s) | Time(s) | Waits(s) | Calls |  Gets  |
=================================================
|    0.02 |    0.02 |     0.00 |     1 |   5868 |
=================================================

SQL Plan Monitoring Details (Plan Hash Value=4286208786)
=======================================================================================================================================================================
| Id |             Operation             |             Name             |  Rows   | Cost |   Time    | Start  | Execs |   Rows   |  Mem  | Activity | Activity Detail |
|    |                                   |                              | (Estim) |      | Active(s) | Active |       | (Actual) | (Max) |   (%)    |   (# samples)   |
=======================================================================================================================================================================
|  0 | SELECT STATEMENT                  |                              |         |      |         1 |     +0 |     1 |        1 |       |          |                 |
|  1 |   SORT AGGREGATE                  |                              |       1 |      |         1 |     +0 |     1 |        1 |       |          |                 |
|  2 |    VIEW                           |                              |    2602 | 5361 |         1 |     +0 |     1 |        4 |       |          |                 |
|  3 |     HASH UNIQUE                   |                              |    2602 | 5361 |         1 |     +0 |     1 |        4 |  840K |          |                 |
|  4 |      PARTITION RANGE SINGLE       |                              |    2602 | 5360 |         1 |     +0 |     1 |     5836 |       |          |                 |
|  5 |       BITMAP INDEX FAST FULL SCAN | T_PARTITIONED_COL1_START_BIX |    2602 | 5360 |         1 |     +0 |     1 |     5836 |       |          |                 |
=======================================================================================================================================================================

The difference is in the little test 4,09 0.02 sec dry. It seems that slow execution must unpack the bitmaps for the separate number - but I do not understand why it is necessary, given that the number of distinct values is not the ROWID (and indeed the conversion seems to be preventable if I look at the quick plan). And to my surprise the simple query is slower.

I also did a trace of cbo (10053) but I don't see a good reason for the difference in behavior here:

-- fast execution
**************************
Query transformations (QT)
**************************
CBQT: Validity checks passed for 8kj3uttv3nt4j.
CSE: Considering common sub-expression elimination in query block SEL$1 (#0)

...

Final query after transformations:******* UNPARSED QUERY IS *******
SELECT COUNT(*) "COUNT(*)" FROM  (SELECT DISTINCT "T_PARTITIONED"."COL1" "COL1" FROM "DBADMIN"."T_PARTITIONED" "T_PARTITIONED" WHERE "T_PARTITIONED"."STARTDATE"=TO_DATE(' 2012-05-22 00:00:00', 'syyyy-mm-dd hh24:mi:ss')) "from$_subquery$_001"


-- slow execution
**************************
Query transformations (QT)
**************************
JF: Checking validity of join factorization for query block SEL$1 (#0)
JF: Bypassed: not a UNION or UNION-ALL query block.
ST: not valid since star transformation parameter is FALSE
TE: Checking validity of table expansion for query block SEL$1 (#0)
TE: Bypassed: No relevant table found.
CBQT bypassed for query block SEL$1 (#0): no complex view, sub-queries or UNION (ALL) queries.
CBQT: Validity checks failed for d0471pgnw27nc.
CSE: Considering common sub-expression elimination in query block SEL$1 (#0)

...

Final query after transformations:******* UNPARSED QUERY IS *******
SELECT COUNT("VW_DAG_0"."ITEM_1") "COUNT(DISTINCTCOL1)" FROM  (SELECT "T_PARTITIONED"."COL1" "ITEM_1" FROM "DBADMIN"."T_PARTITIONED" "T_PARTITIONED" WHERE "T_PARTITIONED"."STARTDATE"=TO_DATE(' 2012-05-22 00:00:00', 'syyyy-mm-dd hh24:mi:ss') GROUP BY "T_PARTITIONED"."COL1") "VW_DAG_0"

So slow execution consider still more possible transformations - but obviously not the one fitting.

The question is: I do not miss a semantic difference between the two queries and is there a good reason why the CBO does not have the transformation of the slow to the fast version?

Concerning

Martin Preiss

mpreiss wrote:

 ==================================================================================================================================================================================================
| Id |             Operation              |             Name             |  Rows   | Cost |   Time    | Start  | Execs |   Rows   | Read | Read  |  Mem  | Activity |      Activity Detail       |
|    |                                    |                              | (Estim) |      | Active(s) | Active |       | (Actual) | Reqs | Bytes | (Max) |   (%)    |        (# samples)         |
==================================================================================================================================================================================================
|  0 | SELECT STATEMENT                   |                              |         |      |         1 |     +4 |     1 |        1 |      |       |       |          |                            |
|  1 |   SORT AGGREGATE                   |                              |       1 |      |         1 |     +4 |     1 |        1 |      |       |       |          |                            |
|  2 |    VIEW                            | VW_DAG_0                     |    2602 | 5361 |         1 |     +4 |     1 |        4 |      |       |       |          |                            |
|  3 |     HASH GROUP BY                  |                              |    2602 | 5361 |         4 |     +1 |     1 |        4 |      |       |  840K |    50.00 | Cpu (2)                    |
|  4 |      PARTITION RANGE SINGLE        |                              |    2602 | 5360 |         3 |     +2 |     1 |      32M |      |       |       |          |                            |
|  5 |       BITMAP CONVERSION TO ROWIDS  |                              |    2602 | 5360 |         3 |     +2 |     1 |      32M |      |       |       |    25.00 | Cpu (1)                    |
|  6 |        BITMAP INDEX FAST FULL SCAN | T_PARTITIONED_COL1_START_BIX |         |      |         3 |     +2 |     1 |     5836 |   62 |  46MB |       |    25.00 | db file scattered read (1) |
==================================================================================================================================================================================================

Martin,

I think it's just one of those things where the code for the optimizer is not uniform in all cases. I first met this anomaly with a query with a subquery IN a few years ago:

select
     dim.*
from     dim
where
     id in (
          select
               distinct status
          from
               area_sales
     )
;

If the breast to a view query online, but is not converted to a semi-join, so you see the same effect. This request is a little weird (it's a business model of the customer). Here is the list rows in a dimension table (with PK) which lies in the fact (with bitmap index) table.

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

| Id  | Operation                       | Name     | Starts | E-Rows | A-Rows |   A-Time   | Buffers |  OMem |  1Mem | Used-Mem |
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT                |          |      1 |        |      6 |00:00:00.01 |      29 |       |       |          |
|*  1 |  HASH JOIN                      |          |      1 |      6 |      6 |00:00:00.01 |      29 |  1594K|  1594K|  865K (0)|
|   2 |   VIEW                          | VW_NSO_1 |      1 |      6 |      6 |00:00:00.01 |      21 |       |       |          |
|   3 |    HASH UNIQUE                  |          |      1 |      6 |      6 |00:00:00.01 |      21 |  1595K|  1595K|  715K (0)|
|   4 |     BITMAP CONVERSION TO ROWIDS |          |      1 |    100K|    100K|00:00:00.01 |      21 |       |       |          |
|   5 |      BITMAP INDEX FAST FULL SCAN| AS_BI    |      1 |        |     30 |00:00:00.01 |      21 |       |       |          |
|   6 |   TABLE ACCESS FULL             | DIM      |      1 |      6 |      6 |00:00:00.01 |       8 |       |       |          |
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The conversion does not occur if you rewrite the manual unnesting query:

select
     dim.*
from     (
     select
          distinct status
     from
          area_sales
     )     sttv,I
     dim
where
     dim.id = sttv.status
;

The strange thing is the 10053 trace shows that this manual rewrite is (apparently) exactly the thing that is well optimized.
In the latest versions of Oracle, plans are lots of volumes and distribution - I saw half a dozen plans different for the same query through three different versions of Oracle.

(In fact, you can see something similar, many queries with subquery costs where the subquery is involved in-the cost of the query automatically to the often seems to be slightly higher than the cost of the subquery manually to the when the manual and automatic plans are the same (otherwise)).

This really expected to have nothing to do with NULL values, moreover, because the bitmap indexes contain a string of NULL values.

Concerning
Jonathan Lewis

AutoComplete suggests my user ID and date of birth on the log in page of my savings account - how can I stop this?

Most of the time the AutoComplete is really useful. However, when I connect my savings account, my user ID and date of birth are available, allowing anyone on my PC to check my account (a security code is required for all transactions which does not seem to be autocomplété!) - how can I turn off this please? This started because I reset Firefox (because of the slow, such as recommended by Firefox). Thank you.

I know how you can do this:
1. Delete an AutoComplete suggestion menu entry drop-down
2. Disable completely auto form fill
3. Clear all saved form autocomplete entries
4. Entered AutoComplete clear form selected (using an add-on)
but I don't think that Firefox has a built-in feature to be selective in what he recorded in the first place.

For items numbered above:

(1) when the suggestion appears, use the arrow keys on the keyboard to select the suggestion unwanted in the list and press the delete key.

See: control if Firefox automatically fills in forms.

But I don't think that this blocks Firefox to save again in the future.

(2) change your privacy settings in the Options dialog box

"3-bar" menu button (or tools) > Options > privacy

If set ' Firefox will be: remember history ' to take ' conservation rules: use the custom settings for history. " Then you can uncheck the box ' Remember search and form history.

(3) clear all AutoComplete form data saved

To clear everything, you can use:

button '3-bar' menu > history > clear recent history

If you do not see a list of check boxes, click the Details button. Deselect all categories other than "Form & Search History" for those who are kept. At the top, set the time interval, and then click clean now.

(4) clear SOME saved form autocomplete entries (when you are not currently using the form)

You need an add-on for that. In the past, I've only tried this one, but there might be other good: https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/addon/form-history-control/

Satellite Pro U200 - incorrect checksum error (ROM (data block))

Hello when I run my Satellite Pro U200 Toahiba
I have an error

Incorrect checksum (ROM (data block))
PRESS ANY KEY TO CONTINUES.

Pleas Help

The most common cause for the mistakes of "Bad Checksum" is the CMOS battery on the motherboard failure.
The battery may be empty or could have been dead. But it's really not easy to say exactly what's wrong!

Therefore, I recommend first to access the BIOS and set it to default settings. Don t forget to save the changes.
More you must connect to the AC adapter and should leave it plugged during on 24 hours to recharge the battery CMOS.

Maybe it helps to get rid of this error message.
If it doesn't help, then you should contact a technician for laptop!

Data block don't request when the Web is not displayed

Hi, I had problems questioning a block master / detail. I have 1 master block which has 7 blocks of retail.
the main block and 4 blocks of retail are Canvas1.
3 of these blocks of detail are in separate paintings (canvas 2, 3, 4)
I have then 3 Summary canvas1 items that show the sum of columns into blocks of 2, 3, 4.
(summ2, summ3, summ4)
Whenever I run EXECUTE_QUERY, it shows the details of the blocks 4 detail.
but for summ2, summ3, summ4. It shows 0.
I have to click the button submit once again just so he could question him again.
no idea why this is happening?
Thank you!

Hello

If I have your correct case, Pls, try using QUESTION after Trigger - level of the form

You can use the u code used in your button with some changes by following the steps...

BEGIN

....

DECLARE

SELECT...

IN: summ2

Of

WHERE...;

EXCEPTION

WHEN NO_DATA_FOUND THEN ("no data found for summary2");

END;

SET_RECORD_PROPERTY(:SYSTEM.TRIGGER_RECORD, :SYSTEM.TRIGGER_BLOCK, STATUS, QUERY_STATUS);

Amatu Allah.

OS and Oracle block size block size

[Condition] If the size of the block of BONE [512 b - 64K] is greater than the size of block Oracle [2K - 16K]
Assume: BONES Block Size: 32K and Oracle block size: 8K
Quebec: One-to-many relationship will always be true? or block Oracle will use 8K to 32 K, and the rest will be unused? or it will return the error at the time of the creation of the data file?

This will challenge the relationship "one to many".

Leader: Oracle logical and physical storage diagram.svg - Wikimedia Commons

Refer to the basis of the diagram.

" --------------------< "="" show's="" one="" to="" many="" relation.="" one="" x="" can="" contain="" many="">

">-------------------<" show's="" many="" to="" many"="" i.e="" many="" x="" can="" contain="" many="">

You don't seem to be read or understand what everyone says.

There is NO such "one to many" relationship. Like I said above

There is no 'validation of one to many '.

1. the operating system uses a given block size

2. you choose an Oracle block size

All these "one to many" is just the result of the choices you made in #2 above. There isn't any 'validation' that occur.

This likely diagram shows this relationship based on the recommendation of Oracle to select a block size that is a multiple of the block size of OS. If you do that this diagram will NOT reflect the case of NORMAL use.

You can't believe everything you see on the internet. Articles/diagrams and others are often from unknown or reliable sources.

2.

'Validation' is not any process.

I just wanted to write the Validation of the theory, the relationship.

Re-read what I just said again above.

There is NO validation. There is NO theory of validation.

All there is is the reality of the block size, you choose and the reality of the OS block size you use. Any relationship between these two values is just a reflection of these two values.

If you choose two different values, they have a completely different relationship to each other.

Oracle works with blocks of the Oracle. The operating system works with the BONE blocks. Oracle does not care really what size a block of BONE is in connection with an Oracle block.

Regarding the authorized request property if the data block is the database no.

I'm now a project located on Oracle Forms 10g.
There is a DataBlock with certain properties such as
1 block of data in the databases: No.
2 query allowed: Yes
3 interrogate the Data Source Type: table
4 insert authorized: Yes
5 update allowed: Yes
6. Remove allowed: Yes
If the DataBlock is not database data block are then properties no. 2 to 6 relevent?
I think these properties must be set to NO and the query data Source Type must be None.
Can someone help me please.

Yes... The block of database property must be "NO"... I made the mistake of typo... You can also change other properties... No problem in that

Verizon Palm Centro with data block incoming picture message issue

My wife & I have Verizon Palm Centro. We have a data block on the account that we only wanted to fuse our PDA with our phone to carry less devices. Recently, someone she knew sent him a picture message. She never received as to be expected since we have a block of data. BUT now his phone constantly freezes and will not allow her to put it to sleep. I noticed that when he behaved in this way, there are two icons triangle above the antenna meter chart, which mean the transfer of data (they go gray and then become green and grey).

To try to remedy the situation, I did a soft reset. One more question. Did a Hard Reset. One more question. She took it to the Verizon store. They said he had no trouble finding. Has continued to be a problem. Then I saw on the Palm site there is an upgrade of the operating system. Done (which includes some reset hard). One more question. The next day, my wife returned to the Verizon store. This time, they saw the issue. They said there was nothing they could do, but give him a new phone. She brings the phone home and same problem. I then HotSync had to get all its data back on the phone.

Now, I get a little concerned, as it has been 5 days since the beginning of the question. As this problem happening my wife tells me of the picture message sent him these days ago. While it's a data connection, I opened the message Centre and there is an icon of mail with arrows to move through it stay at 0%. When that disappears, the triangle icons disappear from the graph of power antenna.

I call the technical assistance. The person is very and said we should would never block because someone should only get this phone for data. I explained that we wanted only to combine devices. I explained the picture message. blah blah blah. He then says that it is from a software on the phone. Takes me through a bunch of read him information. All the time that he does not believe me that it's something to do with the unrecovered MMS (which we do not want yet). In any case, it is more than an hour on the phone with the guy. It had Palm on instant message and at the back of their hand for me. He then tells me to do a Hard Reset. I told her that I've already done a lot and it was not the solution. I had to do because it could it resolve, he said. I did, and for the next few minutes, it doesn't lock upwards with the icons. That is why he said it was fixed and it was something we did on the phone. Then, he wanted to end the call. As he was not driving, I ended the call.

Well.................. I did a restore complete everything on the phone my wife, starting by a Safe Hotsync for his calendar, list of tasks and addresses. Then I restored one - by - one all of his requests including its Documents to go files, etc.. It took another hour +. The phone worked ok for some time and now 1 day later... The same thing is happening again.

Is there a way to stop this madness? Verizon can't kill what is trying to get out? Is there something in the Palm that can kill the message? Any help would be great.

PS Our phones have the same exact software on them with the same applications, provided with the phone and the modules provided by Verizon/Palm. We have the same ringtones. We have the same content of music on our MicroSD cards. The only thing different is photos we have taken. My phone doesn't have this problem. The only difference is that picture stupid someone message. Hopefully, it's not mine. Thanks again.

Thank you very much for the reply. After that I posted this, I contacted Verizon Technical Support. It seems that the problem was exactly what I said it was. There was a picture message which was held by the data block, but still somehow try to get on the phone. I spent some time with a very competent tech person who took the time to solve the problems with me (and down tell me). We tried to remove the block to see if the message would come through. Still problem. We went through all kinds of things to reprogram and realign the phone to the Verizon network. Still problem. Then he looked again and found a setting in the application of message for MMS messages fired automatically. When I disabled this setting, bam message came (no picture because of the block) and the problem stopped. I was very pleased with the help and the phone my wife is no problem.

P.S., while my wife & I have the same contacts this is a manual process to keep the same. We have different identifiers of Palm. Our devices are different. The only reason why I mentioned in my original post how we hae the inforamtion even had to point out that his phone was screwing and mine was not (with essentially the same content). Once again, thank you. G

Message relates to: Centro (Verizon)

The values for the items in the list of the other data blocks appear not when running.

Hello
I have a new problem again.
I'm a new form in which there is about 8 blocks. All blocks have their tables in the oracle database.
Each block has 18 columns with the same column and the column names. But the values in these columns are different and do not match.
The problem is while I sign the form, it fills only the first data block. Other blocks do not display or fill in the values.
I can't create a master relationship because all column values are different.
How show or fill in the values of all the tables?
Please help me. Thank you.

Hello

If your form has really separated tables, then you can simply use a trigger key-exeqry at the level of forms of travel in each block in turn and perform a built-in query execute, eventually returned the starting block.

That is to say

go_block('..');

execute_query;

go_block('..');

execute_query;

etc.

go_item (...);

In this case, you would use the block where clause to constrain each table for the game proper.

If, however, the database has no relationship between the tables, but the content of the data has a correlation, then you could create a relationship of forms manually.

see you soon

Stem

Data block
Do we have any kind of place where you can get data block to the practice. The data must match to a kind of schema object relationship. In bulk means that the number of rows should be in crores. Closely on explain plans with data block.
Random data only get you so far. It is very well for certain types of trials in bulk, but it has two major flaws:

(1) a lot of performance issues come from tilt in our data. Random generatedly values, while presenting tufts of values is wanted to have the extremes of the distribution of the data that we see in actual data. This includes things like the change in length of string.
(2) key generation are difficult. Of course, we can generate unique digital keys with ROWNUM but other types or uniqueness are harder and the hassles of foreign key relationships is a complete hemorrhoid.

So, what to do? Well, there are a number of specific data. The best place to look is [url http://www.infochimps.com/datasets] InfoChimps. This used to be a really great site but the company (not without reason) is looking to make money from their efforts, so they now limit access to a large number of their data sets. However several games is free (although reigistration is necessary) or even some links to hosted public data sets.

Most of the data sets are CSVs, so there is a certain amount of work needed to bring them into a database. However, it is not too difficult with the external tables, and it is also a useful training full-time.

Cheers, APC

determine if the table is use rowid and urowid
Database: Oracle Database 11 g Enterprise Edition Release 11.2.0.3.0 - 64 bit Production

How can we determine whether a table is with rowid and urowid?

Thank you.
>
How can we determine whether a table is with rowid and urowid?
>
Oracle uses a type of ROWID data for all tables; Physical ROWID logical ROWID for the tables organized by index and ordinary tables.

You, the user can also use a ROWID data type and you can use a data UROWID type.

Even if you do not use a real Oracle data type provides a virtual ROWID that you can query. The virtual only takes place in the table but is built on the fly if you use it in a query.
ROWID values are actually stored in the index, but not stored in the tables unless the user sets a ROWID column.

There is no virtual UROWID. If you try to add a query, you will get an exception
```
select rowid, urowid, e.* from emp e

ORA-00904: "UROWID": invalid identifier
```
Refer to the 'presentation of ROWID and UROWID Datatypes' and "The virtual ROWID" in database Concepts
http://docs.Oracle.com/CD/B28359_01/server.111/b28318/datatype.htm#i6732

This article has a detailed explanation of the ROWID, UROWID. data types, the virtual and how Oracle uses.

ORA-01578: ORACLE corrupt data block
DERA Guru,

In the SAP, I have following error in the Oracle database
SQL error in the database when you access a table

"Database of text of the error...:" ORA-01578: corrupted ORACLE data block (record #).
38, block # 72576) ORA-01110: data file 38:
' K:\ORACLE\D01\SAPDATA4\D01_12\D01. "DATA12 '."
How can I solve it. Please guide me...

Thank you for your help and advice...
Take a look at the log of alerts? He could tell you about the type of the damaged object...
otherwise, run this query:
Select *.
from dba_extents
where file_id = 38
and 72576 between block_id and block_id + blocks - 1;

Data block corruption?
Hi all

OraDB 11.2.0.1

Today, we just met this error in oue PROD db. It is the first time that we have achieved this.
```
Caused by: java.sql.SQLException: ORA-01578: ORACLE data block corrupted (file #
5, block # 136230)
ORA-01110: data file 5: 'C:\ORACLE\ORADATA\ORAJVB7\DATATS01.DBF'
ORA-26040: Data block was loaded using the NOLOGGING option
```
My boss ask you what are the usual cause of this issue.
I just said, fluctuations in the power supply and the drive is already old and fragile.
It presents a valid explanation?

How do you handle this issue?
The FF is also acceptable?

startup nomount
recover the database.

Thank you very much

Edited by: KinsaKaUy? on July 18, 2012 20:19
KinsaKaUy? wrote:
Thank you...

I just thought that 11.2.0.1 is now the high-tech modern database and it has a utility to repair the damaged data. Something like fix DBMS exec (Corrupt block). And presto! corruption will be gone.
Why is that the process is still primitive :(

Corruption would be gone on that the storage on which the Oracle block is sitting, would be free of him. If you have a defective material, can not expect Oracle to heal for you, right?

Aman...

How to create a relationship between a Bock DB and not block DB
Hi all

I work with form of oracle 10g.

I created a custom form. I have two blocks. One is a DB block and another block of control (that is to say multi record blk).

I tried to create a relationship master detail between these two blocks.

The Master block: LC_Master_BLK (DB Block).

Detail block: LC_Detail_blk (no DB Block).

Form object browser I click on the link in the block of master and a pop-up window opens and form there I select details of the block.

And I give the join as condition

LC_Master_BLK. PO_HEADER_ID = LC_Detail_blk. PO_HEADER_ID.

I did po_header_id as primary key in my custom table, refred in my main block.

But it shows the error
FRM-15004: error while parsing the condtion of join.

Can someone tell me how to solve this problem.

Thanks and greetings
Srikkanth
Name of query data Source The block property is required to establish a relationship between the two blocs.
Without that you cannot set up a relationship between the two blocs.

In any case

If you get has managed to implement a relationship b/w blocks providing the Query data Source name property value.
You can't enjoy with this relationship
because
No detail block must store data (as it is a block Non-DB)
Nor will it extract data from DB.

Hope you understand this now.

ROWID and data block

Similar Questions

Maybe you are looking for