As per Article mentioned in Oracle Base,I have converted non-partitioned table (1 million data) into range-partition table,but,I don't see performance improvement in explain .
View 9 RepliesI am trying to update a million rows in one table with the values from another tables.
Table being updated CI_ADJ_CHAR column CHAR_VAL_FK1
Table from which values will be used CK_ADJ columns (cx_id, ci_id)
The CI_ADJ_CHAR.CHAR_VAL_FK1 values match CK_ADJ.CX_ID and should be updated with the value CK_ADJ.CI_ID.
The CK_ADJ table has 1.3 million rows and both the columns have indexes defined. Table definitiuon mentioned below
The CI_ADJ_CHAR table has 14 million rows and will update 1 million rows and has an index on the ADJ_ID column but not on the CHAR_VAL_FK1 column.
I have normal tables with hugh Data and would like to increase the performace by following means:
1) Add a new column in each table. Say this column Name is IS_LIVE. This new column have only two value 1 ( LIVE ) OR 0 ( NOT LIVE ).
2) Change the normal tables to Partitioned table. There would be only two partitioned in all the table. The partitioned key column would be IS_LIVE and both partitioend recrods would be in two different tablespace.
3) Added a POLICY function to these partitioned table to Always add a Query Predicate of '1' to all queuries.
I am interested to know that what kind of Indexes ( Global Or local ) would be suitable for these kind of Design.Is there any use of having Local index on IS_LIVE.Please note that Primary Key doesnot have this new column in it.
Is it possible for the DBMS_STATS "LIST STALE" command to show a stale partition but NOT have its table show as stale?
I had a scenario where the table itself AND 1 partition showed as stale. I ran a fnd_stats gather table stats just on that 1 partition. Once it was completed it showed the partition to no longer be stale. it also showed that the table was no longer stale. so I guess I do not need to run stats on the whole table as well?
so if this is the case, when would I need to run stats on the full partitioned table if running it on the partitions themselves removes the staleness of the table?
I have a table that partitioned into six partitions. each partitions placed in different table space and every two table space placed it on a different hardisk
when I will do query select with the non-partition keys condition, how the search process ? whether the sequence (scan sequentially from partition 1 to partition 6) or partition in a hardisk is accessed at the same time with other partition in other hardisk. ( in the image, partition 1,4 accessed at the same time with partition 2,5 and 3,6)
the reason behind the below statements:
1) We cant create TABLE PARTITIONED on CLUSTER or INDEX on CLUSTER TABLE.
2) We cant create a partitioned table with the column of LONG or LONGRAW? (But how it could be possible with BLOB, CLOB?
I think that performance better partition table than non-partition table. How to assure partition table is better than non-partition table at SELECT operation?
I have compare a specific query EXPLAIN PLAN at partition table and non-partition table. both tables data is same. Is it true way or not?
what is the best way to partitioned a non-partitioned table to partitioned table date wise? I have data from last four year?
View 4 Replies View RelatedI created table Rang pertitionned, and List subpartitionned. My table is Interval partitionning. My subpartition is template based as is :
PARTITION BY RANGE ( DINFOIDENTITE )
INTERVAL ( (NUMTOYMINTERVAL(1,'MONTH')) )
SUBPARTITION BY LIST ( AVANT_DERNIER_MATCLE )
[Code]....
i would have the same repartition with 10 differents tablespaces, one for each subpartition.
I search on Oracle documentation this morning, but the only thing i've found is that this option is possible with the STORE IN clause, but only for HASH partitionning.
Is there a way to specify STORAGE clause with a template for my indexes ?
What are the factors that decide on which column we should partition the table and which partition method we should chose.
View 2 Replies View RelatedWays for improving the Table performance which holds million of records for oracle. Currently we have partitioning and indexing but it doesn't seem to work.
View 2 Replies View RelatedI have two tables in which one is partitioned table with the following details.
CREATE TABLE "SCOTT"."TBL_MITTAL"
("ACCOUNT_NAME" VARCHAR2(50 BYTE),
"BILL_NO" VARCHAR2(50 BYTE),
"BILL_DATE" VARCHAR2(50 BYTE),
"CLI" VARCHAR2(50 BYTE),
"ANI" VARCHAR2(50 BYTE),
[code].....
When I am trying to insert record from tbl_mittal into tbl_temp table. I am facing "ORA-14400: inserted partition key does not map to any partition" error
SQL> insert into tbl_temp select * from tbl_mittal;
insert into tbl_temp select * from tbl_mittal
*
ERROR at line 1:
ORA-14400: inserted partition key does not map to any partition
AS tbl_mittal is having hugh number of records so I am providing only few rows from tbl_mittal table as test data.
ACCOUNT_NAMEBILL_NOBILL_DATECLIANICHARGE_START_DATEDURFROM_LOCATIONTO_LOCATIONINVOICE_IDCIRCLE
10000010357423128271095119301-Feb-111723006000931488182328-JAN-11 11.30.54.000000000 AM59.04CHANDIGARHJAIPUR271095119
10000011844187128348720198715-Jun-121409470011825531896615-MAY-12 09.10.36.000000000 AM28.03CHANDIGARHBANTWAL348720198
10000011844187128348720198715-Jun-121409470011825531927115-MAY-12 09.10.41.000000000 AM38.32CHANDIGARHBANTWAL348720198
10000011844187128348720198715-Jun-121409470011825531933015-MAY-12 09.10.46.000000000 AM28.81CHANDIGARHBANTWAL348720198
10000011844187128348720198715-Jun-121409470011825531930215-MAY-12 09.10.53.000000000 AM28.96CHANDIGARHBANTWAL348720198
[code].....
I also tried to upload the same data using sqlldr.
sqlldr log file contents is as follows:
Total logical records skipped: 0
Total logical records read: 1857532
Total logical records rejected: 801092
Total logical records discarded: 37
[code].....
So some sqlldr bad file contents is as follows.
100000118441871,283487201987,15-JUN-12,1723958000,9355115251,10-JUN-12 05.56.05.000000 PM,36.99,CHANDIGARH,AMBALA,348720198,,
100000118441871,283487201987,15-JUN-12,1723958000,7520533825,10-JUN-12 05.56.14.000000 PM,44.12,CHANDIGARH,AGRA,348720198,,
100000118441871,283487201987,15-JUN-12,1723958000,9356452151,10-JUN-12 05.56.17.000000 PM,116.83,CHANDIGARH,JALANDHAR,348720198,,
100000118441871,283487201987,15-JUN-12,1723958000,9331223048,10-JUN-12 05.56.21.000000 PM,28.33,CHANDIGARH,KOLKATA,348720198,,
100000118441871,283487201987,15-JUN-12,1723958000,7827927893,10-JUN-12 05.56.24.000000 PM,3384.33,CHANDIGARH,DELHI,348720198,,
[code].....
I have a huge table (about 60 gb) partition over range. The index on this table is global index created on 4 columns together. I have a query which is running very slowly. The explain plan is showing the use of this global index.Explain plan is not showing pstart and pend because the index is global.
View 6 Replies View RelatedIf we have not set parallel degree for a table then we can ( try to ) force parallel execution on a table using a parallel hint Does this 'parallelism' works on the index search in the query as well?
In which situations non-parallel non-partitioned table but parallel index (degree>2) will facilitate a query?
Can I add range sub partition to a hash partition table. Example like this.
CREATE TABLE test
(
test_id VARCHAR2(10 ) ,
test_TYPE VARCHAR2(5) ,
CREATE_DATE date
)
partition by hash (test_id, test_type)
Partitions 3
SUBPARTITION BY RANGE (CREATE_DATE);
When Tried, I am getting syntax error as invalid option.
I want to add a partition into a ranged partioned table but I receive error:
ALTER TABLE t_log
ADD
PARTITION p897_fft
VALUES
LESS THAN (898);
ORA-14074: partition bound must collate higher than that of the last partition
i check the high value like this:
SELECT partition_name, high_value
FROM dba_tab_partitions
WHERE table_name = 'T_LOG'
AND table_owner = 'PLAT'
[code]........
now, what to do? i dont want to remove Partition P899_MCDW. How to Split?
16:28:32 SQL> create bitmap index bp_idx_ag_id on transactions(type);
create bitmap index bp_idx_ag_id on transactions(type)
*
ERROR at line 1:ORA-25122: Only LOCAL bitmap indexes are permitted on partitioned tables
how to create bitmap index on partitiioned tables
I want to make full table scan of my query so that I can execute it using parallel option & the query will get completed in few mins. Even though I used this hint "/*+ parallel(t2,4) full(t2) */, the query is executing with 8 parallel processes but it is going for "Rowid Range Scan" and it is taking more time to complete. How to make this query to go for full table scan instead of "Rowid Range Scan" so that this query can be tuned.
SELECT /*+ parallel(t2,4) full(t2)*/ID, COUNT (1) FROM acnt_transact t2 GROUP BY ID;
While trying partition exchange feature of Oracle with 2 hash partitioned tables, I come to know that I can't directly exchange partitions between 2 partitioned tables
I have two hash partitioned tables , so to move partition data from one table to another will include-
1) Exchange from partitioned table to non-partitioned table.
2) exchange from non-partitioned table to new partitioned table.
But I am not sure in which hash partition my data will go in new partitioned table (data need to be moved has single key value on basis of which tables are partitioned),
I have table with 129 million records.
If I just to select count(*) on the table its taking more than a minute in Sql Developer.
The table structure is as below, Primary key is a sequence and then 3 foriegn keys and one non-unique index on the date column.
<Table_Name>
column1 NOT NULL NUMBER ( Primary Key)
column2 NOT NULL NUMBER ( FK1)
[Code].....
How can i force a sql use index range scan?
View 10 Replies View RelatedI am adding condition in color to my existing query but my query taking too long time after that. This condition calculates last 3 month end dates from given COB (20110516).
SUMMARY is my summarized table and COB is my reference table
Without adding condition in query it gives
INDEX (RANGE SCAN)--PK_SUMMARY(INDEX(UNIQUE))
After adding condition in query it gives
INDEX(FAST FULL SCAN)--PK_SUMMARY(INDEX(UNIQUE))
how can i keep RANGE SCAN even after adding my new conditions?
SELECT
distinct
COB.COB_ID_C,
SUMMARY.SUMM_COB_ID_C
FROM
[code]...
In the link below [URL] Thomas kyte has said, use the CBO and select /*+ FIRST_ROWS */ primary_key from table where rownum = 1; it'll read the index and stop at the first row. very fast on a big empty table (as the index is small and empty).
very fast on a big full table as the index is just read to find the first leaf node and then "stop".
It gives faster result if the primary key is used. But what if we have a table with around 1000 million rows and for the predicates there is a index range scan on the table.
What if we have a table say big_table (10000000000 rows) and the sql is something like
select /*+ first_rows */ 1 /* id, attribute_id*/
from big_table
where attribute_name ='Gross Premium'
and value ='10000'
and version_date is null
and rownum=1; --it's taking around 3 min
We observed that in such case there will be a range index scan for the index on the predicates. For a particular id there may be different values for attribute 'Gross Premium' and may have multiple versions.
How I would tune such a query where the purpose is to check if at least 1 records exists in the table for the input?
here we have an scenario where we want to find out all the sql statements that are executed in a particular time. The sql statements are executed via our application. I tried in awr report but it shows only the sql query which has taken long time to execute. and i even tried in V$session and V$sqlarea. how to view the executed sql statements in a particular session/current session
View 3 Replies View Relatedi have table with range partition and list sub-partition..can i add one more list sub-partition if it is not possible , i have to drop first sub-partition.
View 6 Replies View RelatedWe have 525 partitions and we want find out partition wise total count. finding partitionwise count in a particular table.
View 12 Replies View RelatedSo our situation is pretty simple. We have 3 tables.
A, B and C
the model is A->>B->>C
Currently A, B and C are range partitioned on a key created_date however it's typical that only C is every qualfied with created date. There is a foreign key from B -> A and C -> Bhave many queries where the data is identified by state that is indexed currently non partitioned on columns in A ... there are also indexes on the foreign keys that get from C -> B -> A. Again these are non partitioned indexes at this time.
It is typical that we qualifier A on either account or user or both. There are indexes (non partitioned on these) We have a problem with now because many of the queries use leading wildcards ie. account like '%ACCOUNT' etc. This often results in large full table scans. Our solution has been to remove the leading wildcard.
We are wondering how we can benefit from partitioning and or sub partitioning table A. since it's partitioned on created_date but rarely qualified by that. We are also wondering where and how we can benefit from either global partitioned index or local partitioned indexes on tables A. We suspect that the index on the foreign key from C to B could be a local partitioned index.
We have few tables in our production database which are havoc in size and will increase in size in future too so as part of the corrective measures , we have jotted down the below 3 methods to manage the size of those tables :-
1> Partitioning the table and take the export of identified partitions and after that, truncate those partition.
2> Creating history tables and remove not so current data from the original table to history table.
We have a large customer table so first thought was to partition.Also we see two union alls in the plan - can we introduce parallelism? Below is the plan - have attached a text file if difficult to read
SELECT V_IDENTIFIER_LOOKUP.UID_V_IDENTIFIER_LOOKUP AS "UID",
V_IDENTIFIER_LOOKUP.ABA, V_IDENTIFIER_LOOKUP.ADDRESS1,
V_IDENTIFIER_LOOKUP.ADDRESS2, V_IDENTIFIER_LOOKUP.ADDRESS3,
V_IDENTIFIER_LOOKUP.ADDRESS4, V_IDENTIFIER_LOOKUP.ALIAS,
V_IDENTIFIER_LOOKUP.CITY, V_IDENTIFIER_LOOKUP.COUNTRYCODE,
V_IDENTIFIER_LOOKUP.CUST_CODE, V_IDENTIFIER_LOOKUP.CUST_NAME,
V_IDENTIFIER_LOOKUP.HEAD_OFFICE_IN,
V_IDENTIFIER_LOOKUP.IDENTIFIER,
V_IDENTIFIER_LOOKUP.IDENTIFIER_TYPE,
[code]...
Is it possible to build index partition in parallel?I tried following command
alter index <index_name> rebuild partition <partition name> online parallel 5;
It executed without complaining, but want to know if index partitions can be build in parallel?