Why SYS. DBMS_PARALLEL_EXECUTE. CREATE_CHUNKS_BY_ROWID creates sometimes higher than expected pieces?

Similar Questions

• New files created when to split a PDF file using the Adobe SDK are much higher than expected

  Hello. I use the kit Adobe SDK to split large PDF into a set of small PDF files, using a set of page ranges. I created 2 PDDocs.  One is for the original PDF, which I open it.  In the other, I insert a range of pages of the original.  I'm doing this for each set of pages.

  objPDDocNew.InsertPages (-1, objPDDoc, startPage - 1, lngPageCount, 0)

  It works fine, except that the combined size of the smaller PDF files is 10 or more times the size of the original PDF file! Y at - it an explanation for that? Y at - it a setting that I can put to reduce the size of the output files? I run my program of my Windows 7 desktop that has Adobe Acrobat XI. Thanks for any help you can provide.

  You can get an idea on what elements are the use of how much space in the PDF file by opening the various Acrobat Pro files, and then select file > save as other > optimized PDF - then click on the "Use of space Audit" button in the upper right corner of the dialog box that opens. When you compare the use of the space of your source files with the file target that you can discover what is causing the increase in the size.

• When I export to PDF from InDesign, my page size is higher than expected.

  I have an InDesign document with a page size of 8.5 "x 11".  There bleeding from. 125 "on each side.  When I export to PDF and look at the properties of the document, the page size is 9.33 "x 11.83".  I thought it would be 8.75 "x 11.25".  Why the page size par.83 instead de.25?

  Hmmm... can't reproduce here. Of course, including any kind of landmarks of the printer in the output increases the size of larger than the pad page + bleed, but as long as I have let everything under "Brand" unchecked by default and tick the check box use Document bleed settings under bleed and Slug, I get the 8.75 x 11.25 expected.

• Size of the PDF forms are higher than expected

  Hi, I seem to have a problem with the file size of my PDF Forms.

  I have created on Adobe LiveCycle Designer ES2 9.0.0.2.20120627 xfa forms and they are all at least 1 big MB which is large enough for an xfa form.

  When I initially create an xfa form, it is around 11-12 Kb, when I add a few items in the shape that it is not too large, 30-90 Kb around, but when I have almost completed my forms it always ends with 1 MB of data.

  I thought that maybe it's because I'm pasting some already created objects from another on a new, but this is not the case.

  Before that, I checked the XML source to see if there is anything suspicious about the forms and I created if I could find something the size of my PDF files.

  I have seen my biggest form who have 15 k lines of XML coding and 1,386 Mb and another with only 5 k lines of XML coding and 1,303 Mb.

  So here, the ratio is 10 k XML encoding is equal to 83 KB. A blank form is about 136 coding XML and is equal to 10 KB.

  When I see other forms that I didn't create, other sources, they are around 300-600 Kb...

  Now I wonder what could be the reason why my forms are so much bigger.

  Would it because I'm not on the side Server encoding?

  Is it because of my Script objects?

  Or because I'm missing something on xfa forms?

  Or, maybe because I don't use Action Builder?

  Or that's what I think, I use different functions, more it grows, perhaps as a result of using these functions, objects of reference?

  If anyone knows what is the main reason for a PDF size XFA form, I would like to know.

  Thank you

  Hello

  the reasons for the large files are generally images and embedded fonts.

  In forms with the default fonts like Arial or Myriad Pro, it is unwise to incorporate fonts in Reader/Acrobat already has the fonts and do not need to be incorporated.

  Only Arial needs about 450 KB in a form.

  If you use images don't embed them, because it means that they get stored as a string encoded in base64 in the XML source instead of a stream encoded flate in the PDF.

  Base64 is very clumsy and needs more space.

• B110a; Scanned PDF outs are higher than expected.

  I had the same problem with my old HP. When I scan a 'document', produced pdf file size exceeds 1 MB (even I do not of highest quality breaks, instead with just the default values)? Any changes applied to the default values, somehow later I tried but failed to any working solution that he abandoned the size. Do against this problem, what I use this doPDF, Nitro... products to re - PDF. HP > outputs pdf 1 MB can be resized down to<135KB! interestingly="" enough="" i="" could="" not="" find="" a="" working="" solution="" to="" that="" persisting="" problem.="" how="" can="" i="" fix="" this="" issue?="" where="" and="" how="" that="" sizing="" be="">

  Hello

  Hope that helps the following article:

  http://www.computerhope.com/issues/ch001383.htm

  Kind regards.

• There was an update to Windows XP sp1 would recognize higher than 127 readers ~ 137 GB, why this update was not in the version later service pack?

  (1) there was an update to Windows XP sp1 would recognize higher than 127 readers ~ 137 GB, why this update was not in the version later service pack?

  (2) where can I find so that I can then reinstall windows XP, updated to sp1, install the patch to see the complete player to sp2 and 3 can be installed?

  original title: supervision XP

  Maybe the disc has been formatted as part of your original installation of Windows XP with a pre - SP1 version of Windows.  At that point, he could only format the drive as 137 GB.  After you upgrade to a post-SP1 version of Windows, look at your hard drive with Disk Manager (start-> Run-> "diskmgmt.msc").  It can show the rest of your unused space that you might then be able to allocate in a second partition.

  If you want to keep one big partition, you will need to get a 3rd third party tool that can extend your current 137 GB partition to use more of the available space.  Google for it, plenty of them out there including those that are free.

  HTH,
  JW

• Can I mix up to 32 bits at a higher than 44.1 kHz sampling frequency?

  When I'm using Ableton Live, it allows me to choose 16, 24 or 32-bit, and then I can choose a up to 192000 sample rate.  Is this possible in the hearing?  I've been through all the preferences and all tabs and I can't find this option.  Everything I find is a convert, or the option adjust.  But this isn't what I want.  I want to mix down this way.

  The closest thing is when I go to "Export Audio Mix Down", I found, I can select 32-bit.  Then, there is a box for the sampling rate, with all the different values.  But it doesn't allow me to change of 44100.

  ?

  sleepwalk1000 wrote:

  Thanks for the responses guys.  Hmm, well the reason why I ask this question is because I am preparing a cd to be sent to a mastering studio.  The engineer told me to mix down to 24 bits instead of 16 bit.  I asked him why, because everything happens to 16 bit cd anyway.  He said even if my session has 16 bit files, if I have them running through the beaches with effects bus vst as Altiverb (which I do), it will improve the sound effects in mixdown, if treated according to a higher bitrate.  Would poll better mix so he could work in the mastering session.  I assumed that this meant that a higher sampling frequency would also be beneficial.  Maybe not?  I use a lot of high-quality vst effects, so I want to make sure I get the best possible results.  I mean if you have this option and space disk hard isn't a problem, why wouldn't you use it?

  It is interesting that the export Audio Mix Down allows me to mix a session from 16-bit to 32-bit files, but if doesn't let me change the sampling frequency.  Maybe I'm not understanding these terms exactly.  I always thought that, for two, more the number, the higher sound quality.

  SteveG - tell you it would be a waste of more than 32 bit 44.1 kHz mixing?  What about k of 48 or 96 k?  There is not a noticeable difference?

  The sample rate only affects the highest frequency that can be solved - it has no impact on the quality of all, once the rate is high enough to fix all that humans can hear. You determine the highest frequency that can be resolved in any case of the sample given by half to get the "Nyquist" frequency - so 44.1 k the highest frequency that can be fully resolved is 22.05 kHz. The human ear extends up to 20 kHz, but it's only in young children - by the time you reach your teenage years he began to fall, especially if you listen to a lot of loud music... then 44.1 k is already greater than any human condition to the response at high frequency. This overall been proved? You bet it has!

  To discover the truth about the hype about the sound quality in general and more bits/sample rate are concerned, you should first read this thread of AudioMasters - and the links it contains. It's of high quality academic research, and all attempts to discredit have been completely ransacked.

  Your mastering engineer is correct up to a point, but not really for the right reasons - mixtures of 32 bits are usually more specific, simply because the sums do more accurately and scale of signal is significantly improved. You must keep in mind that the only place where you will hear no appreciable difference with one more high bit depth would be in really quiet parts of reverb tails. The best way to do a mix in Audition is to do all this in 32-bit (which is floating point version of 24-bit anyway) and if he really wants a 24 bit file, you can convert the 32-bit mix after that you have to create a copy of 24-bit integer. As much as the 16-bit CD is concerned, if you (or engineer) procrastinate it properly when you do the master of the 16 bits of the final mix of 32-bit CD, then the effective resolution is higher than 16 - bit anyway - there is also a thread of AudioMasters explaining all this too (it's complicated).

  What all the above implies, is that if you keep your mix 32 bit 44.1 k files as they are, if you remaster at a higher sample rate, all you have to do is up-conversion files in hearing. You don't win a single thing in doing that, but then again, you won't lose anything either - and person don't will be able to make a difference! This is not a case of "why don't use you it?" - this is really a case of ' why would you? "

  Either way, it should be noted that due to some misinformation presented by people who should really have known better long, understanding of most of the people of sampling is completely and totally false. Once more, a search around AudioMasters will give you a better understanding of the present. If I get a chance later, I'll look on all appropriate threads.

• Why are the jpg created from completely blurry (fuzzy) panoramas? The dng image is strong!

  @ !@

  Why are the jpg created from a panoramas stitched by completely blurry (fuzzy) LR6? The original images as image panorama created by LR is strong!

  Windows Live Photo Gallery is limited to the image files that are smaller than 100 million pixels: "this problem occurs because, by default, Windows Photo Gallery will open not an image file that is greater than 100 million pixels."

  https://support.Microsoft.com/en-us/KB/2725211

  It opens OK, but fuzzy. Here is the message I get when I try to do something in it with your JPEG... or my JPEG:

  

  Your JPEG's 109 million pixels.

• I look at the TB dashboard seen comes from open TB. On the left, I see folders. The folder "sent", lets say, is higher than the "Outbox" folder I want to

  I look at the TB dashboard seen comes from open TB. On the left, I see folders. The folder "sent", lets say, is higher than the "Outbox" folder I want to put the "Outbox" folder above the folder "sent". How do I do this ever?

  I know that the addon will allow you to rearrange accounts, so you could put 'Local folders' over another e-mail account.
  It will also allow you to use files within an account.

  So if you have a Pop email account that uses the Global setting of the "Inbox", then it should allow you to move the position of the Outbox within this special account.

  But as the 'Outbox' is a 'Local folder' folder, I'm not sure that you can move it out of "Local folders" and reposition it on another account.

  The method for moving files is done via the menu bar.
  'Tools' > 'manually sort folders ".
  Select the folder and use "move up" or "Down" buttons.
  Then click on the button "refresh folderpane' to see the new sort order.

• Why can't I create a new epub file in a model of epub on ibooks author?

  I try to import an epub I created on another platform in iBooks author in order to edit it there and re-export as an epub. When you choose file > new epub file and I choose a model, epub models are not available. No idea why? No work around? I don't see why I can't create an epub from an any epub.

  I don't think that iBA has the functionality you need.  You start with a model of epub and add things to it.

  You must use another application to edit your original epub.  Apple won't do anything for this AFAIK.

• Why my photo album create multiple folders and duplicate my photos in folders?

  Why my photo album create multiple folders and duplicate my photos in folders?

  Can you give us more details about your problem? When this happens? It's an update of iOS for a newer version?

• "Convert higher than 128 kbps AAC bitrate songs?

  Is there still an option in iTunes, while syncing to another device, to "convert higher than 128 kbps AAC bitrate songs?  I've read about it, and I would try it for perhaps more songs on my iPhone when syncing my Mac; a lot of my songs are about 10 MB each, and I think that this would reduce some of them what they give.  But I can't find the option / switch. Thank you...

  I still use iTunes 7.5, so I can't check. I got this information: Chris CA post Sept. 2011 - Ripping the air of smaller size for iPod - https://discussions.apple.com/thread/3345205

• I want to update my IOS7 IOS8 iphone4 or 9 bit that he's not higher than IOS 7

  I want to update my IOS7 IOS8 iphone4 or 9 bit that he's not higher than IOS 7

  The iPhone 4 is limited to iOS 7.1.2

• Why do my windows media sometimes not recognize that there is a disc in the drive when I am trying to burn music on the disc,

  Original title: windows media problems
  Why do my windows media sometimes not recognize that there is a disc in the drive when I am trying to burn music on the disc,

  If you restart WMP when this problem occurs, which helps?

  It seems that the AutoRun or AutoPlay got disabled on your system. Please try the instructions in the following article to reactivate these:

  http://support.Microsoft.com/kb/330135

• Manager tasks shows my CPU 100% usage but when I go to the process tab only a handful of programs with a percentage higher than 0 if displayed and none of those who are more than 3%

  Original title: Task Manager

  Manager tasks shows my CPU 100% usage but when I go to the processes tab and sort by CPU usage there are only a handful of programs with a percentage higher than 0 if displayed and none of those who are more than 3%.  What else is using my system resources that is not displayed by the Task Manager?

  Click Show processes from all users . There may be other systemic processes and processes that run under other accounts.

  Ramesh Srinivasan, Microsoft MVP [Windows Desktop Experience]