Explain plan changing between 9i and 11g

Hi
Recently we migrated the database from 9i to 11g.In 11g environment one query was running for long time and when we comapre the explain plan between 9i and 11g, we found one of the table is going through "INDEX RANGE SCAN NON UNIQUE" in 9i but in 11g it is accessing through "INDEX RANGE SCAN INDEX".
Is there any hint to add so that it will access table through "INDEX RANGE SCAN NON UNIQUE" in 11g?
Please Help.

I agree with Paul.
Why are you assuming that the optimizer in 11g, which has had bug fixes and vast improvements since 9i, is optimizing the query badly just because you think the query is running slowly.
Before making assumptions, you need to find the cause of the issue, not just look for differences in two non-comparible explain plans and assume that's the cause. Adding hints to force indexes and suchlike is not the answer (even though some idiots may suggest it is).
As it says in the documentation in relation to hints:
Comments
Hints were introduced in Oracle7, when users had little recourse if the optimizer generated suboptimal plans. Now Oracle provides a number of tools, including the SQL Tuning Advisor, SQL plan management, and SQL Performance Analyzer, to help you address performance problems that are not solved by the optimizer. Oracle strongly recommends that you use those tools rather than hints. The tools are far superior to hints, because when used on an ongoing basis, they provide fresh solutions as your data and database environment change.

Similar Messages

Performance problem: Query explain plan changes in pl/sql vs. literal args

I have a complex query with 5+ table joins on large (million+ row) tables. In it's most simplified form, it's essentially
select * from largeTable large
join anotherLargeTable anothr on (anothr.id_2 = large.pk_id)
join...(other aux tables)
where large.pk_id between 123 and 456;
Its performance was excellent with literal arguments (1 sec per execution).
But, when I used pl/sql bind argument variables instead of 123 and 456 as literals, the explain plan changes drastically, and runs 10+ minutes.
Ex:
CREATE PROCEDURE runQuery(param1 INTEGER, param2 INTEGER){
CURSOR LT_CURSOR IS
select * from largeTable large
join anotherLargeTable anothr on (anothr.id_2 = large.pk_id)
join...(other aux tables)
where large.pk_id between param1 AND param2;
BEGIN
FOR aRecord IN LT_CURSOR
LOOP
(print timestamp...)
END LOOP;
END runQuery;
Rewriting the query 5 different ways was unfruitful. DB hints were also unfruitful in this particular case. LargeTable.pk_id was an indexed field as were all other join fields.
Solution:
Lacking other options, I wrote a literal query that concatenated the variable args. Open a cursor for the literal query.
Upside: It changed the explain plan to the only really fast option and performed at 1 second instead of 10mins.
Downside: Query not cached for future use. Perfectly fine for this query's purpose.
Other suggestions are welcome.

AmandaSoosai wrote:
I have a complex query with 5+ table joins on large (million+ row) tables. In it's most simplified form, it's essentially
select * from largeTable large
join anotherLargeTable anothr on (anothr.id_2 = large.pk_id)
join...(other aux tables)
where large.pk_id between 123 and 456;
Its performance was excellent with literal arguments (1 sec per execution).
But, when I used pl/sql bind argument variables instead of 123 and 456 as literals, the explain plan changes drastically, and runs 10+ minutes.
Ex:
CREATE PROCEDURE runQuery(param1 INTEGER, param2 INTEGER){
CURSOR LT_CURSOR IS
select * from largeTable large
join anotherLargeTable anothr on (anothr.id_2 = large.pk_id)
join...(other aux tables)
where large.pk_id between param1 AND param2;
BEGIN
FOR aRecord IN LT_CURSOR
LOOP
(print timestamp...)
END LOOP;
END runQuery;
Rewriting the query 5 different ways was unfruitful. DB hints were also unfruitful in this particular case. LargeTable.pk_id was an indexed field as were all other join fields.
Solution:
Lacking other options, I wrote a literal query that concatenated the variable args. Open a cursor for the literal query.
Upside: It changed the explain plan to the only really fast option and performed at 1 second instead of 10mins.
Downside: Query not cached for future use. Perfectly fine for this query's purpose.
Other suggestions are welcome.Best wild guess based on what you've posted is a bind variable mismatch (your column is declared as a NUMBER data type and your bind variable is declared as a VARCHAR for example). Unless you have histograms on the columns in question ... which, if you're using bind variables is usually a really bad idea.
A basic illustration of my guess
http://blogs.oracle.com/optimizer/entry/how_do_i_get_sql_executed_from_an_application_to_uses_the_same_execution_plan_i_get_from_sqlplus

Explain plan change after partitioning - Bitmap conversion to rowid

hi gurus,
before partitioning the table using range paritioning,
for the query,
SELECT MEDIUMID
          FROM MEDIUM_TB
          WHERE CMREFERENCEID =8
           AND CONTENTTYPEID = 8
           AND CMSTATUSID = 5
           AND SUBTYPEID = 99
A. before partitioning
SELECT STATEMENT, GOAL = ALL_ROWS          2452     882     16758
SORT ORDER BY               2452     882     16758
TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID     DBA1     MEDIUM_TB     2451     882     16758
   BITMAP CONVERSION TO ROWIDS
    BITMAP AND
     BITMAP CONVERSION FROM ROWIDS
      INDEX RANGE SCAN      DBA1     MEDIUM_TB_IX07     242     94423
     BITMAP CONVERSION FROM ROWIDS
      INDEX RANGE SCAN      DBA1     MEDIUM_TB_IX02     1973     94423
B. after partitioning
the explain plan changed to
SELECT STATEMENT, GOAL = ALL_ROWS          33601     796     15124
TABLE ACCESS BY GLOBAL INDEX ROWID     DBA1     MEDIUM_TB     33601     796     15124
INDEX RANGE SCAN     DBA1     MEDIUM_TB_IX07     300     116570     as you can see in the plan, the paln cost is very high after partitioning and the query is taking more time.
index MEDIUM_TB_IX02 is not used in the second plan and also the plan method BITMAP CONVERSION.
fyi, there is all the indexes are b-tree based and global indexes.
what could be reason for the plan change?
please help
thanks,
charles

user570138 wrote:
SELECT STATEMENT, GOAL = ALL_ROWS          2452     882     16758
SORT ORDER BY               2452     882     16758
TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID     DBA1     MEDIUM_TB     2451     882     16758
BITMAP CONVERSION TO ROWIDS
BITMAP AND
BITMAP CONVERSION FROM ROWIDS
INDEX RANGE SCAN      DBA1     MEDIUM_TB_IX07     242     94423
BITMAP CONVERSION FROM ROWIDS
INDEX RANGE SCAN      DBA1     MEDIUM_TB_IX02     1973     94423
If you supplied proper execution plans we might be able to offer some advice.
Use dbms_xplan.
A list of the index definitions might also help
Regards
Jonathan Lewis

Explain plan changing after partition exchange

I currently have a data warehouse where I use partition exchange to refresh the data. I'm finding that after a partition exchange of exactly the same data. explain plan changes.
database 11.2.0.2
To demonstrate what I'm doing I simplified the steps.
first I gather stats on the table that will be exchanged and run explain plan
exec dbms_stats.gather_table_stats( ownname=> 'IDW_TARGET', tabname=> 'PROGRAM_DIM' );
Select
FROM IDW_TARGET.ITD_MONTHLY_SUMMARY_FACT A,
IDW_TARGET.GL_PERIOD_DIM B,
IDW_TARGET.PROGRAM_DIM C,
IDW_TARGET.RPT_ENTITY_DIM D
WHERE ASST_SEC_CONCISE_NAME = 'abc'
AND A.GL_PERIOD_KEY = B.KEY
AND A.PROGRAM_KEY = C.KEY
AND A.RPT_ENTITY_KEY = D.KEY
AND B.PERIOD_YEAR >= 2006;
** uses FTS on fact table and runs in 20 seconds. **
| Id | Operation | Name | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time | Pstart| Pstop | TQ |IN-OUT| PQ Distrib |
| 0 | SELECT STATEMENT | | 25M| 71G| 47105 (1)| 00:09:26 | | | | | |
| 1 | PX COORDINATOR | | | | | | | | | | |
| 2 | PX SEND QC (RANDOM) | :TQ10003 | 25M| 71G| 47105 (1)| 00:09:26 | | | Q1,03 | P->S | QC (RAND) |
|* 3 | HASH JOIN | | 25M| 71G| 47105 (1)| 00:09:26 | | | Q1,03 | PCWP | |
| 4 | BUFFER SORT | | | | | | | | Q1,03 | PCWC | |
| 5 | PX RECEIVE | | 4551 | 1773K| 103 (0)| 00:00:02 | | | Q1,03 | PCWP | |
| 6 | PX SEND BROADCAST | :TQ10000 | 4551 | 1773K| 103 (0)| 00:00:02 | | | | S->P | BROADCAST |
| 7 | PARTITION RANGE SINGLE | | 4551 | 1773K| 103 (0)| 00:00:02 | 1 | 1 | | | |
| 8 | TABLE ACCESS FULL | RPT_ENTITY_DIM | 4551 | 1773K| 103 (0)| 00:00:02 | 1 | 1 | | | |
|* 9 | HASH JOIN | | 25M| 61G| 46999 (1)| 00:09:24 | | | Q1,03 | PCWP | |
| 10 | BUFFER SORT | | | | | | | | Q1,03 | PCWC | |
| 11 | PX RECEIVE | | 184 | 35696 | 5 (0)| 00:00:01 | | | Q1,03 | PCWP | |
| 12 | PX SEND BROADCAST | :TQ10001 | 184 | 35696 | 5 (0)| 00:00:01 | | | | S->P | BROADCAST |
| 13 | PARTITION RANGE SINGLE | | 184 | 35696 | 5 (0)| 00:00:01 | 1 | 1 | | | |
|* 14 | TABLE ACCESS FULL | GL_PERIOD_DIM | 184 | 35696 | 5 (0)| 00:00:01 | 1 | 1 | | | |
|* 15 | HASH JOIN | | 25M| 57G| 46992 (1)| 00:09:24 | | | Q1,03 | PCWP | |
| 16 | BUFFER SORT | | | | | | | | Q1,03 | PCWC | |
| 17 | PX RECEIVE | | 4085 | 6829K| 1334 (1)| 00:00:17 | | | Q1,03 | PCWP | |
| 18 | PX SEND BROADCAST | :TQ10002 | 4085 | 6829K| 1334 (1)| 00:00:17 | | | | S->P | BROADCAST |
| 19 | PARTITION RANGE SINGLE| | 4085 | 6829K| 1334 (1)| 00:00:17 | 1 | 1 | | | |
|* 20 | TABLE ACCESS FULL | PROGRAM_DIM | 4085 | 6829K| 1334 (1)| 00:00:17 | 1 | 1 | | | |
| 21 | PX BLOCK ITERATOR | | 71M| 45G| 45650 (1)| 00:09:08 | 1 | LAST | Q1,03 | PCWC | |
| 22 | TABLE ACCESS FULL | ITD_MONTHLY_SUMMARY_FACT | 71M| 45G| 45650 (1)| 00:09:08 | 1 | 141 | Q1,03 | PCWP | |
Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
3 - access("A"."RPT_ENTITY_KEY"="D"."KEY")
9 - access("A"."GL_PERIOD_KEY"="B"."KEY")
14 - filter("B"."PERIOD_YEAR">=2006)
15 - access("A"."PROGRAM_KEY"="C"."KEY")
20 - filter("ASST_SEC_CONCISE_NAME"='abc'')
drop table PELPROGRAMDIMALLDATA; -- Start fresh here and drop the partition that will be exchanged
create table PELPROGRAMDIMALLDATA as select * from PROGRAM_DIM; -- going to use exact same data for partition exchange (only one parition)
alter table PELPROGRAMDIMALLDATA add constraint CON_342 unique ("VALUE" ) using index ;
alter table PELPROGRAMDIMALLDATA add constraint CON_343 primary key ("KEY" ) using index ;
exec dbms_stats.gather_table_stats(ownname=>'IDW_TARGET', tabname=>'PELPROGRAMDIMALLDATA');
alter table PROGRAM_DIM exchange partition ALL_DATA with table PELPROGRAMDIMALLDATA excluding indexes;
** rebuild indexes **
** explain plan for same statement uses nested loop**
| Id | Operation | Name | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time | Pstart| Pstop | TQ |IN-OUT| PQ Distrib |
| 0 | SELECT STATEMENT | | 2637K| 7514M| 33428 (1)| 00:06:42 | | | | | |
| 1 | PX COORDINATOR | | | | | | | | | | |
| 2 | PX SEND QC (RANDOM) | :TQ10003 | 2637K| 7514M| 33428 (1)| 00:06:42 | | | Q1,03 | P->S | QC (RAND) |
|* 3 | HASH JOIN | | 2637K| 7514M| 33428 (1)| 00:06:42 | | | Q1,03 | PCWP | |
| 4 | BUFFER SORT | | | | | | | | Q1,03 | PCWC | |
| 5 | PX RECEIVE | | 4551 | 1773K| 103 (0)| 00:00:02 | | | Q1,03 | PCWP | |
| 6 | PX SEND BROADCAST | :TQ10000 | 4551 | 1773K| 103 (0)| 00:00:02 | | | | S->P | BROADCAST |
| 7 | PARTITION RANGE SINGLE | | 4551 | 1773K| 103 (0)| 00:00:02 | 1 | 1 | | | |
| 8 | TABLE ACCESS FULL | RPT_ENTITY_DIM | 4551 | 1773K| 103 (0)| 00:00:02 | 1 | 1 | | | |
|* 9 | HASH JOIN | | 2637K| 6511M| 33324 (1)| 00:06:40 | | | Q1,03 | PCWP | |
| 10 | BUFFER SORT | | | | | | | | Q1,03 | PCWC | |
| 11 | PX RECEIVE | | 184 | 35696 | 5 (0)| 00:00:01 | | | Q1,03 | PCWP | |
| 12 | PX SEND BROADCAST | :TQ10001 | 184 | 35696 | 5 (0)| 00:00:01 | | | | S->P | BROADCAST |
| 13 | PARTITION RANGE SINGLE | | 184 | 35696 | 5 (0)| 00:00:01 | 1 | 1 | | | |
|* 14 | TABLE ACCESS FULL | GL_PERIOD_DIM | 184 | 35696 | 5 (0)| 00:00:01 | 1 | 1 | | | |
| 15 | NESTED LOOPS | | 2642K| 6035M| 33318 (1)| 00:06:40 | | | Q1,03 | PCWP | |
| 16 | BUFFER SORT | | | | | | | | Q1,03 | PCWC | |
| 17 | PX RECEIVE | | | | | | | | Q1,03 | PCWP | |
| 18 | PX SEND ROUND-ROBIN | :TQ10002 | | | | | | | | S->P | RND-ROBIN |
| 19 | PARTITION RANGE SINGLE | | 420 | 702K| 220 (0)| 00:00:03 | 1 | 1 | | | |
| 20 | TABLE ACCESS BY LOCAL INDEX ROWID| PROGRAM_DIM | 420 | 702K| 220 (0)| 00:00:03 | 1 | 1 | | | |
|* 21 | INDEX RANGE SCAN | PROGRAM_DIM_IX20 | 420 | | 3 (0)| 00:00:01 | 1 | 1 | | | |
| 22 | PARTITION RANGE ALL | | 6299 | 4201K| 33318 (1)| 00:06:40 | 1 | 9 | Q1,03 | PCWP | |
| 23 | PARTITION LIST ALL | | 6299 | 4201K| 33318 (1)| 00:06:40 | 1 | LAST | Q1,03 | PCWP | |
| 24 | TABLE ACCESS BY LOCAL INDEX ROWID | ITD_MONTHLY_SUMMARY_FACT | 6299 | 4201K| 33318 (1)| 00:06:40 | 1 | 141 | Q1,03 | PCWP | |
| 25 | BITMAP CONVERSION TO ROWIDS | | | | | | | | Q1,03 | PCWP | |
|* 26 | BITMAP INDEX SINGLE VALUE | ITD_MONTHLY_SUMMARY_SK09 | | | | | 1 | 141 | Q1,03 | PCWP | |
Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
3 - access("A"."RPT_ENTITY_KEY"="D"."KEY")
9 - access("A"."GL_PERIOD_KEY"="B"."KEY")
14 - filter("B"."PERIOD_YEAR">=2006)
21 - access("ASST_SEC_CONCISE_NAME"='abc')
26 - access("A"."PROGRAM_KEY"="C"."KEY")
exec dbms_stats.gather_table_stats( ownname=> 'IDW_TARGET', tabname=> 'PROGRAM_DIM' );
** explain plan for same statement uses full table scan**
see first explain plan
Since the stats were not gathered after the partition exchange I would imagine that they would still be used.
Edited by: user12198207 on Feb 7, 2012 8:13 AM
Edited by: user12198207 on Feb 7, 2012 9:47 AM

Locking stats did not make any difference. Also, I deleted the stats at the global level leaving just partition stats and it continued to use the nested loop which takes 15+ minutes instead of 20 seconds with the FTS.
In my original situation it listed the stats at the global level as stale after the partition exchange. But after I removed many of the steps and use just what's described in this posts.
select * from dba_tab_statistics
where table_name='PROGRAM_DIM';
shows stale stats=no for both global and partition. Kind of unexpected. Further digging in shows that is just determined by a case statement.
from dba_tab_statistics view ddl
case
when t.analyzetime is null then null
when ((m.inserts + m.deletes + m.updates) >
t.rowcnt *
to_number(DBMS_STATS.GET_PREFS('STALE_PERCENT',
u.name, o.name))/100 or
bitand(m.flags,1) = 1) then 'YES'
else 'NO'
end

Data mismatch between 10g and 11g.

Hi
We recently upgraded OBIEE to 11.1.1.6.0 from 10.1.3.4.0. While testing we found data mismatch between 10g and 11g in-case of few reports which are including a front end calculated column with division included in it, say for example ("- Paycheck"."Earnings" / COUNT(DISTINCT "- Pay"."Check Date")) / 25.
The data is matching for the below scenarios.
1) When the column is removed from both 10g and 11g.
2) When the aggregation rule is set to either "Sum or Count" in both 10g and 11g.
It would be very helpful and greatly appreciated if any workaround/pointers to solve this issue is provided.
Thanks

jfedynic wrote:
The 10g and 11.1.0.7 Databases are currently set to AL32UTF8.
In each database there is a VARCHAR2 field used to store data, but not specifically AL32UTF8 data but encrypted data.
Using the 10g Client to connect to either the 10g database or 11g database it works fine.
Using the 11.1.0.7 Client to go against either the 10g or 11g database and it produces the error: ORA-29275: partial multibyte character
What has changed?
Was it considered a Bug in 10g because it allowed this behavior and now 11g is operating correctly?
29275, 00000, "partial multibyte character"
// *Cause: The requested read operation could not complete because a partial
//          multibyte character was found at the end of the input.
// *Action: Ensure that the complete multibyte character is sent from the
//          remote server and retry the operation. Or read the partial
//          multibyte character as RAW.It appears to me a bug got fixed.

Please give the diagrams to explain the difference between MVC1 and MVC2

Please give the functional diagrams to explain the difference between MVC1 and MVC2

there is no MVC1 or MVC2, only the MVC pattern. The implementation of the MVC is fairly open-ended and there are some variations that are not named as different "versions" because each variation still has the same pattern: there is a model, there are views and there are controllers. What you list as a "feature" of MVC2 in your other post:
http://forum.java.sun.com/thread.jspa?threadID=719812&tstart=0
is merely the implementation of a front controller (becoming more popular nowadays) in stead of using multiple controllers. There is no change in pattern, only in implementation.

How to join three tables and practical difference between 10g and 11g

I want to know with example how to outer join three different tables in Oracle.
Also if you have any website or reference for understand syntax or performance difference between 10g and 11g then please paste a link in.thanks!!

Hi,
897293 wrote:
I want to know with example how to outer join three different tables in Oracle.The 3rd table comes into the result set the same way the 2nd one did:
FROM           table_1 t1
LEFT OUTER JOIN      table_2 t2 ON   ...
LEFT OUTER JOIN      table_3 t3 ON   ...The join condition(s) for t3 can reference t1, or t2, or both.
Also if you have any website or reference for understand syntax or performance difference between 10g and 11g then please paste a link in.thanks!!The main manuals all have "What's New" sections near the beginning. For example:
http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/B28359_01/server.111/b28286/wnsql.htm#sthref5
Hoek,
We've missed you. Welcome back!

NVL in view: discrepancy between 10G and 11G

Hi,
I've discovered some discrepancy between 10G and 11G in a way how view deals with NVL-based column in a where clause.
Here are two examples:
*10G:*
Connected to:
Oracle Database 10g Release 10.2.0.4.0 - Production
SQL> create table test_nvl (null_column number);
Table created.
SQL> insert into test_nvl values (null);
1 row created.
SQL> commit;
Commit complete.
SQL> create view view_nvl as select nvl(null_column,0) null_column from test_nvl;
View created.
SQL> select * from view_nvl where null_column is not null and null_column = 0;
NULL_COLUMN
0
*11G*
Connected to:
Oracle Database 11g Release 11.2.0.1.0 - 64bit Production
SQL> create table test_nvl (null_column number);
Table created.
SQL> insert into test_nvl values (null);
1 row created.
SQL> commit;
Commit complete.
SQL> create view view_nvl as select nvl(null_column,0) null_column from test_nvl;
View created.
SQL> select * from view_nvl where null_column is not null and null_column = 0;
no rows selected
Does anyone know why it behaves differently?
I couldn't find any documentation regarding this.
Or I'm just missing something here.
Thanks

BANNER
Oracle Database 11g Enterprise Edition Release 11.2.0.2.0 - 64bit Production
PL/SQL Release 11.2.0.2.0 - Production
CORE     11.2.0.2.0     Production
TNS for HPUX: Version 11.2.0.2.0 - Production
NLSRTL Version 11.2.0.2.0 - Production
CREATE TABLE test_nvl (null_column NUMBER);
INSERT INTO test_nvl
     VALUES (NULL);
COMMIT;
CREATE VIEW view_nvl
AS
   SELECT NVL (null_column, 0) null_column FROM test_nvl;
SELECT *
FROM view_nvl
WHERE null_column IS NOT NULL AND null_column = 0;
NULL_COLUMN
0

Is there any difference between 10g and 11g M Views?

Hi,
I need to give a demo on and working examples of materialized views. The requirement is this: Master tables are in a 10g R2 DB, MV is in a 11g.
I just create a DB Link in 11g to point to the 10g DB and then create the MV in 11g.
Will there be any problems creating a 11g MV using 10 Master tables?
My question is are there any significant differences between 10g and 11g MViews??
Thanks & Regards,
Channa.

You have to be careful about your versions. 10g could be 10.1 or 10.2 11g could be 11.1 or 11.2
I wouldn't have an 11.2 database with a database link against a 10.1 database.
In fact, even with 10.2, I would try to ensure that I have a "high patchset" (10.2.0.4 or 10.2.0.5) although, in theory, 10.2.0.1 should also work.
See Oracle Support article
Client / Server / Interoperability Support Between Different Oracle Versions [ID 207303.1]
Hemant K Chitale

Difference between 10g and 11g OEM

Hi,
I would like to know what is the difference between 10g and 11g Grid control. Unfortunately I have worked only on 11g Grid Control. So do not not what exactly are the differences like from GUI features,installation steps.
Thank you....

Hi,
From 11g grid Weblogic also introduced. You can refer this below note for understanding even architecture.
*Understanding the Enterprise Manager 10g and 11g Grid Control Management Agent, Directory Structure and Key Configuration Files. [ID 234872.1]*

Explain plan change

9.2.0.8 on solaris 10
What are the scenarios that an explain plan will change when using RBO as optimizer_mode
we have a query like :
select * emp where empno=101;
For this query , the explain plan uses the index in the column empno where as the query :
select * emp where empno=501;
doesn't use a index . the time taken for retreival is the same . but why does the explain plan change ?.
Do we have to collect stats when using RBO ?
I tried tracing the above sessions, but couldn't find any diff (just to let you know that I tried )
Edited by: user12046873 on Feb 28, 2010 10:43 PM

It appears you are not using RBO, because using RBO would have resulted in the same execution plans. PERIOD.
Nor should you use RBO, as CBO provides way better execution plans.
You don't post these execution plans, nor how you retrieved them, so no comments are possible.
They need to be the live execution plan from a trace file,+not using explain=+ as that will have tkprof calculate the explain plan.
Sybrand Bakker
Senior Oracle DBA

DM3.0 EA2: Filter engineering changes between logical and relational model

Hi,
when I am engineering changes between logial and relational model there are some issues at filter handling for me:
- When the filter "Show Modified Objects" is activated, the filter works only on the first level, e.g. on Entity level. On attribute level all attributes are displayed, not only the attributes which have really been modified. It is possible, to show on every level only the really modified objects?
- I think, selecting a Filter condition is circuitous. All filter conditions except "Show All Objects" keeps activated when I choose another condition. So I have to deactivate "Show Deleted Objects" when I want to see only the modified objects. It is possible to choose another control element for filtering, e.g. disjunctive radio buttons?
I am running Data Modeler on Windows XP with german localization and the JDK 1.6.0_11 from Oracle SQL Developer.

I logged bug for that.
Philip

Change between mono- and stereo-sound

My question is if there is any way to change between mono and stereo sound on the ipod nano 3th generation...?
Thanks for help!

Are you not getting stereo? What are you listening with - maybe there's a plug problem...
Does it sound like stereo from iTunes?

DB LINK between XE and 11g instances

Hello ,
I am facing the following problem.
I have 3 databases instances on 3 servers on is Xe,the second is 10 R2 and
the third instance is 11g.
I have create db link between Xe and 10g and vice-versa (10g and Xe)
the db links in the two senses are working fine.
But i could not create db link between xe and 11g nor between 11g and Xe.
I will give some detail
On Xe dblink pointing to 11g , when accessed give the message :
"ORA-01017 : Invalid username/password;logon denied ORA-02063 preceding db11g"
i am sure that user name and password i give in db link creation are correct and tried it many times.
From the other side
On 11g dblink pointing to Xe instance when ,accessed give the folowing result :
i could access some table (select * from t1@dbxe)
but some times i got message : "Internal server Error" for the same select on the same table.
When i try to access fonction f1 on dbxe from 11g instace , i got the message
"ORA-04052 : Error when quering remote object f1@dbxe ORA-00604.."
Does any body have some idea about the issue ?
thanks in advance.

Is your 11g database configured to use case-sensitive passwords? If so, are you specifying a case-sensitive (quoted) password in the creation of your database link?
Joel

Can someone explain the difference between TIER_WEB and TIER_WEBDEV

Hi All,
We have two sets of values in Context file as below.
<TIER_ADWEB oa_var="s_isAdWeb">NO</TIER_ADWEB>
<TIER_ADFORMS oa_var="s_isAdForms">NO</TIER_ADFORMS>
<TIER_ADFORMSDEV oa_var="s_isAdFormsDev">NO</TIER_ADFORMSDEV>
<TIER_ADWEBDEV oa_var="s_isAdWebDev">NO</TIER_ADWEBDEV>
Could you explain the difference between
TIER_WEB and TIER_WEBDEV
and
TIER_ADFORMS and TIER_ADFORMSDEV

These values in a shared APPL_TOP system. Pl see ML Doc 745580.1 (Apply Patches in a Shared Application Tier File System Environment) for an explanation.Not necessarily in Shared APPL_TOP, even in traditional multi-node installation you will find these values in the application context file.
I never came across any document which describes the difference between TIER_WEBDEV and TIER_WEB, I just can say that these variables always have the same value.

Explain plan changing between 9i and 11g

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for