Change next clause (alter index)

Hello,
We've an index created with a too much next value and we want to decrease it.
Is there any wait to do it different to rebuild?
Thanks in advance for your help.
Regards,
Carles

Yes you can do with rebuild:
ALTER INDEX indexname REBUILD storage(next 1m);
Note: if the index resides in LMT with auto or uniform extent allocation, it will take tablespace default next extent size, rather the specified one.
Jaffar

Similar Messages

What is the option of 'parallel' do in alter index.. ?

In the alter index command the option of parallel is there ?
alter index <indexname> parallel <integer>
What exactly does it do ?
PARALLEL integer : Specification of integer indicates the degree of parallelism,
which is the number of parallel threads used in the parallel operation. Each parallel thread may use one or two parallel execution servers. Normally Oracle calculates the optimum degree of parallelism, so it is not necessary for you to specify integer.

Parallel clause if used allows one to break-up a given SQL statement so that its parts can run simultaneously on different processors in a multi-processor machine. Uisng parallel while rebuilding indexes is a good option to fasten up things.But this parallelism should be change back to noparallel or to degree 1(both are same) after rebuilding.When you use parallel clause you can check in the V$session view , many (P000,P001,P002 etc) processes get started, to fasten the query. You can go through through the below link which would be helpful for you.
Link: [http://www.orafaq.com/faqopq.htm#PERF]
Re: Parallel degree for index
HTH
Anand

ORA-02243:invalid ALTER INDEX or ALTER MATERIALIZES VIEW option

Hi, Friend,
I am changing all the index to another tablespace of one of my schema.When I run the DDL script,got the error:
ORA-02243:invalid ALTER INDEX or ALTER MATERIALIZES VIEW option
I checked the metalink, got nothing.Anyone can help? Thanks!

I also googled some info,like:
Oracle Error :: ORA-02243
invalid ALTER INDEX or ALTER MATERIALIZED VIEW option
Cause
An option other than INITRANS, MAXTRANS,or STORAGE is specified in an ALTER INDEX statement or in the USING INDEX clause of an ALTER MATERIALIZED VIEW statement.
Action
Specify only legal options.
But I still can't find the clue.

Question on fragmentation and ALTER INDEX REBUILD/REORGANIZE not effecting it

The problem I ran into was troubleshooting a sporadically slow singleton lookup on a Clustered Index in a table with about 8 million rows, which is a separate issue I may need to submit for help. That aside, during that troubleshooting I noticed fragmentation
on the Unique Clustered Index (it's a VARCHAR(20)), and then noticed the fragmentation in other indexes on this table. See sys.dm_db_index_physical_stats and DBCC SHOWCONTIG results below.
SELECT
substring(OBJECT_NAME(i.object_id),1,30) AS TableName,
substring(i.name,1,40) AS TableIndexName,
i.index_id, phystat.index_level,
phystat.avg_fragmentation_in_percent
FROM
sys.dm_db_index_physical_stats(DB_ID(), NULL, NULL, NULL, 'DETAILED') phystat inner JOIN sys.indexes i
ON i.object_id = phystat.object_id
AND i.index_id = phystat.index_id WHERE
OBJECT_NAME(i.object_id) = 'CONSUMERS'
TableName TableIndexName index_id index_level avg_fragmentation_in_percent
CONSUMERS UNI2K_CONSUMERS 1 0
0.154827346202469
CONSUMERS UNI2K_CONSUMERS 1 1
35.2941176470588
CONSUMERS UNI2K_CONSUMERS 1 2
0
CONSUMERS PK__CONSUMER__7F6B0B8B286302EC 2 0 0.336078590685822
CONSUMERS PK__CONSUMER__7F6B0B8B286302EC 2 1 100
CONSUMERS PK__CONSUMER__7F6B0B8B286302EC 2 2 0
CONSUMERS UNI1K_CONSUMERS 3 0
0.156451316031658
CONSUMERS UNI1K_CONSUMERS 3 1
61.1510791366906
CONSUMERS UNI1K_CONSUMERS 3 2
0
CONSUMERS IDX1_CONSUMERS 4 0
0.215271389144434
CONSUMERS IDX1_CONSUMERS 4 1
40
CONSUMERS IDX1_CONSUMERS 4 2
100
CONSUMERS IDX1_CONSUMERS 4 3
0
CONSUMERS IDX2_CONSUMERS 5 0
0.222614710968834
CONSUMERS IDX2_CONSUMERS 5 1
38.6281588447653
CONSUMERS IDX2_CONSUMERS 5 2
75
CONSUMERS IDX2_CONSUMERS 5 3
0
(17 row(s) affected)
DBCC SHOWCONTIG('CONSUMERS') WITH ALL_INDEXES
DBCC SHOWCONTIG scanning 'CONSUMERS' table...
Table: 'CONSUMERS' (645577338); index ID: 1, database ID: 5
TABLE level scan performed.
- Pages Scanned................................: 70401
- Extents Scanned..............................: 8827
- Extent Switches..............................: 8843
- Avg. Pages per Extent........................: 8.0
- Scan Density [Best Count:Actual Count].......: 99.51% [8801:8844]
- Logical Scan Fragmentation ..................: 0.15%
- Extent Scan Fragmentation ...................: 23.76%
- Avg. Bytes Free per Page.....................: 47.2
- Avg. Page Density (full).....................: 99.42%
DBCC SHOWCONTIG scanning 'CONSUMERS' table...
Table: 'CONSUMERS' (645577338); index ID: 2, database ID: 5
LEAF level scan performed.
- Pages Scanned................................: 27077
- Extents Scanned..............................: 3402
- Extent Switches..............................: 3402
- Avg. Pages per Extent........................: 8.0
- Scan Density [Best Count:Actual Count].......: 99.47% [3385:3403]
- Logical Scan Fragmentation ..................: 0.34%
- Extent Scan Fragmentation ...................: 11.88%
- Avg. Bytes Free per Page.....................: 24.1
- Avg. Page Density (full).....................: 99.70%
DBCC SHOWCONTIG scanning 'CONSUMERS' table...
Table: 'CONSUMERS' (645577338); index ID: 3, database ID: 5
LEAF level scan performed.
- Pages Scanned................................: 54330
- Extents Scanned..............................: 6803
- Extent Switches..............................: 6805
- Avg. Pages per Extent........................: 8.0
- Scan Density [Best Count:Actual Count].......: 99.79% [6792:6806]
- Logical Scan Fragmentation ..................: 0.16%
- Extent Scan Fragmentation ...................: 7.03%
- Avg. Bytes Free per Page.....................: 50.3
- Avg. Page Density (full).....................: 99.38%
DBCC SHOWCONTIG scanning 'CONSUMERS' table...
Table: 'CONSUMERS' (645577338); index ID: 4, database ID: 5
LEAF level scan performed.
- Pages Scanned................................: 54350
- Extents Scanned..............................: 6808
- Extent Switches..............................: 6837
- Avg. Pages per Extent........................: 8.0
- Scan Density [Best Count:Actual Count].......: 99.36% [6794:6838]
- Logical Scan Fragmentation ..................: 0.22%
- Extent Scan Fragmentation ...................: 7.17%
- Avg. Bytes Free per Page.....................: 53.2
- Avg. Page Density (full).....................: 99.34%
DBCC SHOWCONTIG scanning 'CONSUMERS' table...
Table: 'CONSUMERS' (645577338); index ID: 5, database ID: 5
LEAF level scan performed.
- Pages Scanned................................: 54354
- Extents Scanned..............................: 6804
- Extent Switches..............................: 6846
- Avg. Pages per Extent........................: 8.0
- Scan Density [Best Count:Actual Count].......: 99.24% [6795:6847]
- Logical Scan Fragmentation ..................: 0.22%
- Extent Scan Fragmentation ...................: 7.13%
- Avg. Bytes Free per Page.....................: 53.8
- Avg. Page Density (full).....................: 99.33%
DBCC execution completed. If DBCC printed error messages, contact your system administrator.
This fragmentation I found shocking because I reorg nightly and have a weekly rebuild task running that I set up through the Maintenance Plan wizard (which I've verified has been running). So I attempted to reorg these manually (especially index ID: 1)
and to my shock the fragmentation % did not change at all. I then took the SQL provided by the Maintenance Plan for rebuilding the indexes and found that after running that it didn't change the fragementation % at all either (commands run shown below).
ALTER INDEX [IDX1_CONSUMERS] ON [dbo].[CONSUMERS] REBUILD PARTITION = ALL WITH ( PAD_INDEX = OFF, STATISTICS_NORECOMPUTE = OFF, ALLOW_ROW_LOCKS = ON, ALLOW_PAGE_LOCKS = ON, ONLINE = ON, SORT_IN_TEMPDB = ON )
GO
ALTER INDEX [IDX2_CONSUMERS] ON [dbo].[CONSUMERS] REBUILD PARTITION = ALL WITH ( PAD_INDEX = OFF, STATISTICS_NORECOMPUTE = OFF, ALLOW_ROW_LOCKS = ON, ALLOW_PAGE_LOCKS = ON, ONLINE = ON, SORT_IN_TEMPDB = ON )
GO
ALTER INDEX [UNI1K_CONSUMERS] ON [dbo].[CONSUMERS] REBUILD PARTITION = ALL WITH ( PAD_INDEX = OFF, STATISTICS_NORECOMPUTE = OFF, ALLOW_ROW_LOCKS = ON, ALLOW_PAGE_LOCKS = ON, IGNORE_DUP_KEY = OFF, ONLINE = ON, SORT_IN_TEMPDB
= ON )
GO
ALTER INDEX [UNI2K_CONSUMERS] ON [dbo].[CONSUMERS] REBUILD PARTITION = ALL WITH ( PAD_INDEX = OFF, STATISTICS_NORECOMPUTE = OFF, ALLOW_ROW_LOCKS = ON, ALLOW_PAGE_LOCKS = ON, IGNORE_DUP_KEY = OFF, ONLINE = ON, SORT_IN_TEMPDB
= ON )
GO
Fragmentation did not change until I performed a "CREATE ... DROP_EXISTING = ON" on the 4 non PK indexes and a manual rebuild of Primary Key offline not specifying any other parameters, which all seemed completely overkill to ensure the defragmentation
actually got done. Final sys.dm_db_index_physical_stats and DBCC SHOWCONTIG results below.
SELECT
substring(OBJECT_NAME(i.object_id),1,30) AS TableName,
substring(i.name,1,40) AS TableIndexName,
i.index_id, phystat.index_level,
phystat.avg_fragmentation_in_percent
FROM
sys.dm_db_index_physical_stats(DB_ID(), NULL, NULL, NULL, 'DETAILED') phystat inner JOIN sys.indexes i
ON i.object_id = phystat.object_id
AND i.index_id = phystat.index_id WHERE
OBJECT_NAME(i.object_id) = 'CONSUMERS'
TableName TableIndexName index_id index_level avg_fragmentation_in_percent
CONSUMERS UNI2K_CONSUMERS 1 0
0.0213458562356583
CONSUMERS UNI2K_CONSUMERS 1 1
11.2426035502959
CONSUMERS UNI2K_CONSUMERS 1 2
0
CONSUMERS PK__CONSUMER__7F6B0B8B286302EC 2 0 0.0460971112476951
CONSUMERS PK__CONSUMER__7F6B0B8B286302EC 2 1 14.2857142857143
CONSUMERS PK__CONSUMER__7F6B0B8B286302EC 2 2 0
CONSUMERS UNI1K_CONSUMERS 3 0
0.0225314031431307
CONSUMERS UNI1K_CONSUMERS 3 1
10.6194690265487
CONSUMERS UNI1K_CONSUMERS 3 2
0
CONSUMERS IDX1_CONSUMERS 4 0
0.0225318262045139
CONSUMERS IDX1_CONSUMERS 4 1
10.7296137339056
CONSUMERS IDX1_CONSUMERS 4 2
0
CONSUMERS IDX1_CONSUMERS 4 3
0
CONSUMERS IDX2_CONSUMERS 5 0
0.0225314031431307
CONSUMERS IDX2_CONSUMERS 5 1
12.0171673819742
CONSUMERS IDX2_CONSUMERS 5 2
0
CONSUMERS IDX2_CONSUMERS 5 3
0
(17 row(s) affected)
DBCC SHOWCONTIG('CONSUMERS') WITH ALL_INDEXES
DBCC SHOWCONTIG scanning 'CONSUMERS' table...
Table: 'CONSUMERS' (645577338); index ID: 1, database ID: 5
TABLE level scan performed.
- Pages Scanned................................: 56217
- Extents Scanned..............................: 7029
- Extent Switches..............................: 7028
- Avg. Pages per Extent........................: 8.0
- Scan Density [Best Count:Actual Count].......: 99.99% [7028:7029]
- Logical Scan Fragmentation ..................: 0.02%
- Extent Scan Fragmentation ...................: 0.44%
- Avg. Bytes Free per Page.....................: 32.4
- Avg. Page Density (full).....................: 99.60%
DBCC SHOWCONTIG scanning 'CONSUMERS' table...
Table: 'CONSUMERS' (645577338); index ID: 2, database ID: 5
LEAF level scan performed.
- Pages Scanned................................: 26032
- Extents Scanned..............................: 3256
- Extent Switches..............................: 3255
- Avg. Pages per Extent........................: 8.0
- Scan Density [Best Count:Actual Count].......: 99.94% [3254:3256]
- Logical Scan Fragmentation ..................: 0.05%
- Extent Scan Fragmentation ...................: 0.31%
- Avg. Bytes Free per Page.....................: 11.1
- Avg. Page Density (full).....................: 99.86%
DBCC SHOWCONTIG scanning 'CONSUMERS' table...
Table: 'CONSUMERS' (645577338); index ID: 3, database ID: 5
LEAF level scan performed.
- Pages Scanned................................: 53259
- Extents Scanned..............................: 6659
- Extent Switches..............................: 6658
- Avg. Pages per Extent........................: 8.0
- Scan Density [Best Count:Actual Count].......: 99.98% [6658:6659]
- Logical Scan Fragmentation ..................: 0.02%
- Extent Scan Fragmentation ...................: 0.35%
- Avg. Bytes Free per Page.....................: 40.5
- Avg. Page Density (full).....................: 99.50%
DBCC SHOWCONTIG scanning 'CONSUMERS' table...
Table: 'CONSUMERS' (645577338); index ID: 4, database ID: 5
LEAF level scan performed.
- Pages Scanned................................: 53258
- Extents Scanned..............................: 6659
- Extent Switches..............................: 6658
- Avg. Pages per Extent........................: 8.0
- Scan Density [Best Count:Actual Count].......: 99.98% [6658:6659]
- Logical Scan Fragmentation ..................: 0.02%
- Extent Scan Fragmentation ...................: 0.53%
- Avg. Bytes Free per Page.....................: 40.3
- Avg. Page Density (full).....................: 99.50%
DBCC SHOWCONTIG scanning 'CONSUMERS' table...
Table: 'CONSUMERS' (645577338); index ID: 5, database ID: 5
LEAF level scan performed.
- Pages Scanned................................: 53259
- Extents Scanned..............................: 6659
- Extent Switches..............................: 6658
- Avg. Pages per Extent........................: 8.0
- Scan Density [Best Count:Actual Count].......: 99.98% [6658:6659]
- Logical Scan Fragmentation ..................: 0.02%
- Extent Scan Fragmentation ...................: 0.59%
- Avg. Bytes Free per Page.....................: 40.5
- Avg. Page Density (full).....................: 99.50%
DBCC execution completed. If DBCC printed error messages, contact your system administrator.
For the record, here's the version I'm running:
select @@VERSION
Microsoft SQL Server 2008 R2 (SP1) - 10.50.2500.0 (X64)
Jun 17 2011 00:54:03
Copyright (c) Microsoft Corporation
Enterprise Edition (64-bit) on Windows NT 6.1 <X64> (Build 7601: Service Pack 1)
In summary my question is - why didn't ALTER INDEX ... REBUILD/REORGANIZE modify the index_level 1 fragmentation as reported by sys.dm_db_index_physical_stats, nor would it correct the Extent Scan Fragmentation as reported by DBCC SHOWCONTIG?

Hi Brian.cs ,
SQL Server will not rebuild indexes that are not large enough. Could you please have a look a the
fragment_count which is one of the fields in the
sys.dm_db_index_physical_stats view to check whether it is low or not ?
Best Regards,
Peja
Please remember to click "Mark as Answer" on the post that helps you, and to click "Unmark as Answer" if a marked post does not actually answer your question. This can be beneficial to other community members reading the thread.
Peja, here's the information you requested, and of course this was after I dropped/recreated because rebuild didn't seem to actually address the fragmentation - the index I was most concerned about at index_level = 0 showed a fragment_count = 8922. FYI this
table has over 8 million rows. And apologies for the delayed response, was on vacation over the near year.
SELECT
substring(OBJECT_NAME(i.object_id),1,30) AS TableName,
substring(i.name,1,40) AS TableIndexName,
i.index_id, phystat.index_level,
phystat.avg_fragmentation_in_percent, fragment_count
FROM
sys.dm_db_index_physical_stats(DB_ID(), NULL, NULL, NULL, 'DETAILED') phystat inner JOIN sys.indexes i
ON i.object_id = phystat.object_id
AND i.index_id = phystat.index_id WHERE
OBJECT_NAME(i.object_id) = 'CONSUMERS'
TableName TableIndexName index_id index_level avg_fragmentation_in_percent
fragment_count
CONSUMERS UNI2K_CONSUMERS 1 0
0.259780818806428 8922
CONSUMERS UNI2K_CONSUMERS 1 1
39.4190871369295 86
CONSUMERS UNI2K_CONSUMERS 1 2
0 1
CONSUMERS PK__CONSUMER__7F6B0B8B286302EC 2 0 0.240887634434766
5182
CONSUMERS PK__CONSUMER__7F6B0B8B286302EC 2 1 80.3738317757009
84
CONSUMERS PK__CONSUMER__7F6B0B8B286302EC 2 2 0
1
CONSUMERS UNI1K_CONSUMERS 3 0
0.0661472879611936 8532
CONSUMERS UNI1K_CONSUMERS 3 1
53.4883720930233 86
CONSUMERS UNI1K_CONSUMERS 3 2
0 1
CONSUMERS IDX1_CONSUMERS 4 0
0.192426334498663 8598
CONSUMERS IDX1_CONSUMERS 4 1
31.5315315315315 95
CONSUMERS IDX1_CONSUMERS 4 2
85.7142857142857 7
CONSUMERS IDX1_CONSUMERS 4 3
0 1
CONSUMERS IDX2_CONSUMERS 5 0
0.189494094835184 8613
CONSUMERS IDX2_CONSUMERS 5 1
31.8840579710145 97
CONSUMERS IDX2_CONSUMERS 5 2
85.7142857142857 7
CONSUMERS IDX2_CONSUMERS 5 3
0 1

Alter index rebuild with online option

I created a spatial index with the following statement:
SQL> create index A3_IX1_A on A67(GEOMETRIE) indextype is mdsys.spatial_index parameters ('sdo_non_leaf_tbl=TRUE; sdo_dml_batch_size =
2 1000');
I want to rebuild the index with the next statement:
SQL> alter index ttnl.A3_IX1_A rebuild online parameters ('index_status=cleanup;sdo_dml_batch_size=1000');
the result is the next error message:
alter index ttnl.A3_IX1_A rebuild online parameters ('index_status=cleanup;sdo_dml_batch_size=1000')
ERROR at line 1:
ORA-29871: invalid alter option for a domain index
Can some one help me?

Hi,
This is only supported in the next release (11.x).
In the release upto 10.2, this functionality is not supported for Spatial indexes.
siva
Message was edited by:
sravada

Alter index ... rebuild was failing - getting corrupt blocks

Database: 9.2.0.5
OS: HPUX-ia64
Hello,
i rebuilded a index, announced from UpdatStats in DB13, and get a ORA-01114: IO error writing block to file 2045 (block # 319154) and
ORA-27072: skgfdisp: I/O error in my sqlplus session.
-> i do a alter index SAPR3."xxx~0" rebuild online parallel 4 nologging;
-> System was up and running
After that, the DBVerify marked some blocks corrupt, here one example:
BR0398E DBVERIFY detected corrupted blocks in /oracle/XXX/sapdata22/btabi_95/btabi.data95
We checked all corrupted blocks - all in free space.
So we fixed that with creating a table with next extend size from the corrupted blocksize.
I think we had not enough space in the tablespace where the index is, okay ... and what we also found, the PSAPTEMP datafiles was created as SPARSE files ...!!
-> PSAPTEMP-Datafile: 10GB in the System - 2,5GB maximum on OS-Level, no more space.
But my question is why i am getting corrupt blocks when a "alter index ... rebuild ..." is failing ?!?!
Thank you for your support.
Regards,
Markus
Edited by: Markus Dinkel on Oct 9, 2008 12:56 PM
Edited by: Markus Dinkel on Oct 9, 2008 12:56 PM
Edited by: Markus Dinkel on Oct 9, 2008 12:59 PM

Thany you for the answer.
I cant find any "cor" entries in the last DBVeriy log.
I think (hope) we dont' have anymore corrupted blocks in the system.
We get a response from SAP to update to 9.2.0.8.
My customer wanna do a update to oracle 10 in march/april 2009, so he send me the question if we need a update to 9.2.0.8 ASAP or can we wait for the update to oralce10.
But the important question from my customer and me is, why we get corrupt blocks after failing the alter index rebuild?
Regards,
Markus

Altering index unuseable from a different schema.

I'm sure I'm overlooking something.
I was recently tasked with taking an existing ETL process that was in several different schemas and centralize it so the controlling procedures and functions are all in one schema, and the tables that are being loaded are in various schemas.
We're using a dirrect load, with insert (/* append*/) which is much fast than any other method we've found to load the tables. The trouble I'm having is in disabling the indexes. It's used to be that the procedure that altered the indexes was owned by the same schema that owned the indexes. That was working fine.
So,
Schema 'A' owns the table and indexes.
Schema 'B' owns the procedure that will alter the indexes to set them to unuseable.
Schema B has been granted GRANT ALTER, INSERT, SELECT, UPDATE, DELETE to all tables in Schema 'A'
I am logged in a Schema 'B' and I run the following command...
ALTER INDEX A.PROC_DETAILS_ENC_ID_IDX UNUSABLE
I get ....
Index altered.
However if I run the same thing in a function, I get ...
ORA-01418: specified index does not exist
That seems odd to me that I can run it from toad, but not in a function?

user12221955 wrote:
That seems odd to me that I can run it from toad, but not in a function?Check role-based vs direct grant privileges. PL/SQL does not like role-based privileges and tends to ignore them while running. Directly granted privileges are not so affected. Directly grant the privileges you want to the PL/SQL procedure owner.

Invalid XMLIndex after a series of ALTER INDEX.

I was unable to drop my SPECVALUETEST table or drop the IDX_1_NODE XMLIndex after I performed a series of ALTER INDEX on IDX_1_NODE.
Connected to:
Oracle Database 11g Enterprise Edition Release 11.1.0.6.0 - Production
With the Partitioning, OLAP, Data Mining and Real Application Testing options
SQL> drop table specvaluetest;
drop table specvaluetest
ERROR at line 1:
ORA-00604: error occurred at recursive SQL level 2
ORA-30967: operation directly on the Path Table is disallowed
SQL> alter index idx_1_node parameters ( 'PATHS (INCLUDE REMOVE (ALL))' );
alter index idx_1_node parameters ( 'PATHS (INCLUDE REMOVE (ALL))' )
ERROR at line 1:
ORA-29869: cannot issue ALTER without REBUILD on a domain index marked FAILED
SQL> alter index idx_1_node REBUILD parameters ( 'PATHS (INCLUDE REMOVE (ALL))' );
alter index idx_1_node REBUILD parameters ( 'PATHS (INCLUDE REMOVE (ALL))' )
ERROR at line 1:
ORA-29874: warning in the execution of ODCIINDEXALTER routine
ORA-29960: line 1, ORA-30980: Invalid Input.
SQL> alter index idx_1_node REBUILD;
alter index idx_1_node REBUILD
ERROR at line 1:
ORA-29858: error occurred in the execution of ODCIINDEXALTER routine
ORA-30980: Invalid Input.
SQL> drop index idx_1_node;
drop index idx_1_node
ERROR at line 1:
ORA-29856: error occurred in the execution of ODCIINDEXDROP routine
ORA-30980: Invalid Input.
SQL> drop index IDX_1_NODE force;
drop index IDX_1_NODE force
ERROR at line 1:
ORA-00604: error occurred at recursive SQL level 1
ORA-30967: operation directly on the Path Table is disallowed
What I did was:
SPECVALUETEST has 50916 rows of XML documents.
create index idx_1_node on SPECVALUETEST(xmldata) INDEXTYPE IS XDB.XMLINDEX PARAMETERS ( 'PATHS (INCLUDE (/SPEC_10000))');
alter index idx_1_node REBUILD PARAMETERS ( 'PATHS (INCLUDE ADD ( /SPEC_1/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_2/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_3/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_4/FIELDS/
FIELD_1 /SPEC_5/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_6/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_7/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_8/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_9/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_10/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SP
EC_11/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_12/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_13/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_14/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_15/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_16/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_17/
FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_18/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_19/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_20/FIELDS/FIELD_1))');
alter index idx_1_node REBUILD PARAMETERS ( 'PATHS (INCLUDE ADD ( /SPEC_21/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_22/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_23/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_24/FIE
LDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_25/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_26/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_27/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_28/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_29/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_30/FIELDS/FI
ELD_1 /SPEC_31/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_32/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_33/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_34/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_35/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_36/FIELDS/FIELD_1
/SPEC_37/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_38/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_39/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_40/FIELDS/FIELD_1))');
alter index idx_1_node REBUILD PARAMETERS ( 'PATHS (INCLUDE ADD ( /SPEC_41/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_42/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_43/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_44/FIE
LDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_45/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_46/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_47/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_48/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_49/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_50/FIELD
S/FIELD_1 /SPEC_51/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_52/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_53/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_54/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_55/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_56/FIELDS/FIELD_1
/SPEC_57/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_58/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_59/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_60/FIELDS/FIELD_1))');
alter index idx_1_node REBUILD PARAMETERS ( 'PATHS (INCLUDE ADD ( /SPEC_61/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_62/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_63/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_64/FIE
LDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_65/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_66/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_67/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_68/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_69/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_70/FIELDS/FI
ELD_1 /SPEC_71/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_72/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_73/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_74/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_75/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_76/FIELDS/FIELD_1
/SPEC_77/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_78/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_79/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_80/FIELDS/FIELD_1))');
alter index idx_1_node REBUILD PARAMETERS ( 'PATHS (INCLUDE ADD ( /SPEC_81/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_82/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_83/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_84/FIE
LDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_85/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_86/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_87/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_88/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_89/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_90/FIELDS/FI
ELD_1 /SPEC_91/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_92/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_93/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_94/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_95/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_96/FIELDS/FIELD_1
/SPEC_97/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_98/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_99/FIELDS/FIELD_1 /SPEC_100/FIELDS/FIELD_1))');
The last ALTER INDEX failed.
What can I do to drop this index or drop the table if needed? I tried DROP INDEX IDX_1_NODE FORCE, but it didn't work.
Thank you very much.
Peter

Hmmm, after quick scan through your code, it sounds as valid statements.
I would Oracle support have a look at this.
Is your system recyclebin enabled? Do you have recyclebin objects in your schema. Try cleaning up via a purge and try the drop index again...

Problems creating/altering index with certain Word docs

Hello,
I am having an odd problem when attempting to drop/create or alter my index after entering certain MS Word docs in my table.
Has anyone run into this? Does anyone have any insight as to which features in Word docs (e.g. macros, etc.) might cause this problem?
The errors are listed below (they also cause GPFs when extproc.exe runs). Thanks for your help.
Mike
alter index blobdoc_idx rebuild online parameters ( 'sync' )
ERROR at line 1:
ORA-29863: warning in the execution of ODCIINDEXCREATE routine
SQL> CREATE INDEX BLOBDOC_IDX
2 ON BLOBS(DOC_BLOB) INDEXTYPE IS CTXSYS.CONTEXT PARAMETERS('FILTER ctxsys.INSO_FILTER STORAGE
INTERMEDIASTORE LEXER INTERMEDIALEXER');
CREATE INDEX BLOBDOC_IDX
ERROR at line 1:
ORA-29855: error occurred in the execution of ODCIINDEXCREATE routine
ORA-20000: interMedia Text error:
ORA-28579: network error during callback from external procedure agent
ORA-06512: at "CTXSYS.DRUE", line 126
ORA-06512: at "CTXSYS.TEXTINDEXMETHODS", line 54
ORA-06512: at line 1

Additional information: error message found in CTXSYS.DR$INDEX_ERROR TABLE:
DRG-10595: ALTER INDEX BLOBDOC_IDX failed
ORA-28579: network error during callback from external procedure agent
Mike
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Michael Hoekstra ([email protected]):
Hello,
I am having an odd problem when attempting to drop/create or alter my index after entering certain MS Word docs in my table.
Has anyone run into this? Does anyone have any insight as to which features in Word docs (e.g. macros, etc.) might cause this problem?
The errors are listed below (they also cause GPFs when extproc.exe runs). Thanks for your help.
Mike
alter index blobdoc_idx rebuild online parameters ( 'sync' )
ERROR at line 1:
ORA-29863: warning in the execution of ODCIINDEXCREATE routine
SQL> CREATE INDEX BLOBDOC_IDX
2 ON BLOBS(DOC_BLOB) INDEXTYPE IS CTXSYS.CONTEXT PARAMETERS('FILTER ctxsys.INSO_FILTER STORAGE
INTERMEDIASTORE LEXER INTERMEDIALEXER');
CREATE INDEX BLOBDOC_IDX
ERROR at line 1:
ORA-29855: error occurred in the execution of ODCIINDEXCREATE routine
ORA-20000: interMedia Text error:
ORA-28579: network error during callback from external procedure agent
ORA-06512: at "CTXSYS.DRUE", line 126
ORA-06512: at "CTXSYS.TEXTINDEXMETHODS", line 54
ORA-06512: at line 1
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
null

Can't we use function to derive value for NEXT clause in MV ?

Hi Friends,
I have a requirement like below
I need to derive the schedule (Value for NEXT clause in the create MV command) for a MV to run it
e.g., Value from a date column : 03-JUL-2012 10:00 AM, VALUE for NEXT clause in CREATE MV statement should be 03-JUL-2012 04:45 AM (It is -5.45 hrs from the above date column value )
So I wrote a function (GET_DATE) to derive schedule for NEXT clause and tried to call it from NEXT caluse, but it is giving error message as mentioned below
ORA-04044: procedure, function, package, or type is not allowed here
CREATE MATERIALIZED VIEW child_mv
PARALLEL 16
INITRANS 16
STORAGE (
FREELISTS 16
FREELIST GROUPS 4
BUILD IMMEDIATE
REFRESH COMPLETE
NEXT GET_DATE('PARENT_MV')
AS
SELECT * from xxmdme_party_stage where rownum<101;
Could you please help to give some light on how this can be done ?

942661 wrote:
Hi Friends,
I have a requirement like below
I need to derive the schedule (Value for NEXT clause in the create MV command) for a MV to run it
e.g., Value from a date column : 03-JUL-2012 10:00 AM, VALUE for NEXT clause in CREATE MV statement should be 03-JUL-2012 04:45 AM (It is -5.45 hrs from the above date column value )
So I wrote a function (GET_DATE) to derive schedule for NEXT clause and tried to call it from NEXT caluse, but it is giving error message as mentioned below
ORA-04044: procedure, function, package, or type is not allowed here
CREATE MATERIALIZED VIEW child_mv
PARALLEL 16
INITRANS 16
STORAGE (
FREELISTS 16
FREELIST GROUPS 4
BUILD IMMEDIATE
REFRESH COMPLETE
NEXT GET_DATE('PARENT_MV')
AS
SELECT * from xxmdme_party_stage where rownum<101;
Could you please help to give some light on how this can be done ?you must (ab)use EXECUTE IMMEDIATE

Attribute / Hierarchy Change Run and BWA Index

HI!
During my analysis to the perocess chains in our BW/BWA systems, I noticed that Change Run either rollup or update BWA indexes. I am not sure what Change Run exactly does for the indexes, so if you please can help in that it will be great. because we are inpecting that this may caused us a failure in BWA indexes before.
Thanks,
Ghassan Matar

Hi,
Kindly go throught the following link to more about the Hierarchy/Attribute Change Run in BWA indexes,
http://help.sap.com/saphelp_nw70/helpdata/en/9a/e1914206d7a970e10000000a155106/frameset.htm
Regards,
Balajee

Altering index command fails - because of ~ and ^ in index

I have this weird issue when wanting to use a alter index command . see below. I cannot get it to work. Please help.
db2 -tvf another.sql
connect to dbe
   Database Connection Information
Database server        = DB2/AIX64 9.7.4
SQL authorization ID   = DB2DBE
Local database alias   = DBE
ALTER INDEX "SAPDBE "."SLGSK~0" COMPRESSION YES
DB21034E The command was processed as an SQL statement because it was not a
valid Command Line Processor command. During SQL processing it returned:
SQL0104N An unexpected token "COMPRESSION" was found following ""SAPDBE
"."SLGSK~0"". Expected tokens may include: "COMPRESS". SQLSTATE=42601

Hi Anke,
I think in this case, it is not related to the Index name.
Try COMPRESS YES   .. instead of COMPRESSION YES.
Hans-Juergen
Edited by: Hans-Juergen Zeltwanger on Dec 8, 2011 12:09 AM

Want to change the begavior of index sort in webhelp

Hi All,
I want to change the behavior of index sort in webhelp. Which JavaScript file I need to modify.
Thanks in Advance,
Bala

Hi,
I would like to configure the webhelp output so that index sorting should be done as per the sorting order specified in external file. I am able to produce the sorted index items(sorted as per order specified in external) in whidata0.xml. For example, I need all the terms starting with 'T' at the top order. I have whidata0.xml in correct order as I want. But when I view the same in IE, it is inserting some blank spaces insted of terms. When I put them in correct alphabetic order, it is getting displayed correctly (i.e. without blank spaces),.
Thanks,
Bala

Changing Stroke Weight Alters Path

Hello!
At some point over the last couple of days, I did something in Illustrator (probably an accidental key combination) that causes the physical structure of the path to change whenever I alter the thickness of the stroke.
I took a screen capture and uploaded it to YouTube as an example:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9hAA7YIrVwY. You'll notice, in the video, that as the stroke becomes smaller, the path actually shifts down the artboard.
How do I stop this from happening? OR what is the setting that got changed, so that if it happens again in the future, I can fix it? It's been difficult trying to find an answer, since the keywords are pretty relevant to just about ALL Illustrator questions.
Thanks for your help!

steve fairbairn wrote:
Sounds like that "snap to pixel grid" thing that some bright lad at Adobe thought might be a good idea for CS5.
Actually is a godo idea just takes edutacting users to some degree.
Select the path and uncheck Align to Pixel Grid on the Transform panel. Does the problem go away?

Alter index rebuild

Hello, I want to rebuild an index :
SQL> alter index APPLSYS.WF_LOCAL_ROLES_N1 REBUILD ;
alter index APPLSYS.WF_LOCAL_ROLES_N1 REBUILD
ERROR at line 1:
ORA-14086: a partitioned index may not be rebuilt as a whole
What is wrong with my sql instruction ? Should I give partition name may be ? Where can I find partition name for that index ? Many thanks before.

[linuxas oracle test10]$ oerr ora 14086
14086, 00000, "a partitioned index may not be rebuilt as a whole"
// *Cause: User attempted to rebuild a partitioned index using
//          ALTER INDEX REBUILD statement, which is illegal
// *Action: Rebuild the index a partition at a time (using
//          ALTER INDEX REBUILD PARTITION) or drop and recreate the
//          entire index
[linuxas oracle test10]$To see partition names for an index :
SQL> select partition_name from USER_IND_PARTITIONS
2* where index_name = '<YOUR INDEX>';Paul

Change next clause (alter index)

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for