Fragmentation in tables and indexes with 9.2.0.5

Hi guys ,
I need of query to identified fragmentation in tables and indexes using Oracle 9i,someone could help me send that's querys
tks
spaulonci

Fragmentation by itself at the tablespace level doesn't mean any thing from the performance point of view, only from the storage capacity perspective, and this just in case fragments are not necessarily the same size as in the case of dictionary manged tablespaces.
You may be concerned about block density, which actually could lead to performance degradation. I suggest you to consider using coalesce instead of rebuilding in the case of indexes, and in the case of tables you should perform a segment reorganization. In the case of 9iR2 the coalesce command for table segments is not available so you will have to perform another segment reorganization strategy. If there are meaningful differences with the high water mark, average number of rows per block and chained rows then you will notice performance differences.
I suggest you to take metrics for block usage prior to perform an index coalesce operation, as well as prior to perform a data segment reorganization to assess if the reorganization effort is useful.
~ Madrid
http://hrivera99.blogspot.com/

Similar Messages

Fragmentation in tables and indexes

Can exist fragmentation in tables & indexes with ASM?

mexman,
ASM is a disk managment system that has no relationship to the concept of table/index fragmentation.
You probably mean ASSM.
ASSM affects some of the details of how object space is managed but table/index internal fragmentation could still exist though this is usually not an issue with or without ASSM depending on the DML pattern.
Research the archives on this topic as suggested if you want to know about detecting internal object fragmentation.
HTH -- Mark D Powell --

Import dumpfile with seperate tablespaces for table and index

Hi,
We have a schema for which the its tables are stored in seperate tablespace and indexes are stored in different tablespace. Now we have take full schema export. Now we want to import it on another schema. Now I want to know if the we have difference in the tablespace name we use REMAP_TABLESPACE clause of the impdp command but what about the seperate tablespace for table and indexes. How would Oracle handle this.
Regards,
Abbasi

Hi,
I hope you created the same tablespace structure on the target side if not so remap_tablespace option you have to use for specifying different tablespaces.Oracle will take care of putting data and index.Any how if a index is moved from one tablespace to other you have to rebuild them,once you rebuild them than only stattistics are gathered otherwise you
might face some performance issue.
Better option is to keep same tablespace structures in source and target environment.
Best regards,
Rafi.
http://rafioracledba.blogspot.com
Edited by: Rafi (Oracle DBA) on May 9, 2011 7:07 AM

DB02 view is empty on Table and Index analyses DB2 9.7 after system copy

Dear All,
I did the Quality refresh by System copy export/import method. ECC6 on HP-UX DB29.7.
After Import Runstats status n Db02 for Table and Index analysis was empty and all value showing '-1'. Eventhough
a) all standard backgrnd job scheduled in sm36
b) Automatic runstats are enabled in db2 parameters
c) Reorgchk all scheduled periodically from db13 and already ran twice.
4) 'reorgchk update statistics on table all' was also ran on db2 level.
but Run stats staus in db02 was not getting updated. Its empty.
Please suggest.
Regards
Vinay

Hi Deepak,
Yes, that is possible (but only offline backup). But for the new features like reclaimable tablespace (to lower the high watermark)
it's better to export/import with systemcopy.
Also with systemcopy you can use index compression.
After backup and restore you can have also reclaimable tablespace, but you have to create new tablespaces
and then work with db6conv and online table move to move one tablespace online to the new one.
Best regards,
Joachim

Missing Tables and Indexes greyed out in DBACOCKPIT

Hi All,
I use Solution Manager 7.01 with MS SQL Server 2008 DB.
I want to monitor with DBACOCKPIT a MS SQL Server 2005 DataBase of a SAP BPC 5.1.
I connected the DB but in DBACOCKPIT some functionality are greyed out.
I want to use in Diagnostics section the "MISSING TABLES AND INDEXES" function but this command is greyed out.
Is it possible to use this function?
Please, help me!
Regards,
Alessandro

Hi,
Gray color means that screen is disabled for any reason (authorization, SQL Server release, monitoring remote, etc).
I believe, those items cannot be monitored unless these limitations are sorted out.
Please refer to the Document "The SAP DBA Cockpit for Microsoft SQL Server" in SDN.
You can get the status about the restriction in the bottom of dbacockpit screen.
Thanks,
Jagan
Edited by: jagadheeshan govindasamy on Sep 16, 2009 1:03 PM

DB02 = Missing Tables and Indexes = Unknown objects in ABAP Dictionary = DB views

Hi SAP Gurus,
on our SAP NetWeaver 7.x BW (based on AIX/Oracle) I find via transaction DB02 (path = Diagnostics => Missing Tables and Indexes) under "Unknown objects in ABAP Dictionary" under DB views a BW object /BI0/.....
When I make a double click on the object, I am getting the popup window "Display not possible for this object":
How can I identify the object and clarify with the BW application expert, if needed, how to resolve this object?
I searched already via RSA1 for the object, but I wasn't able to find anything so far ...
Thanks for your help and ideas.
Best regards
Carlos

Hello Carlos
The database view in question is a temporary database object created during a query execution.
Please read this SAP note 449891 - Temporary database objects in BW 3.x to understand what that view is all about and impact if those views are removed.
The SAP notes 449891 and 1139396 suggests to run the report SAP_DROP_TMPTABLES to drop these temporary objects. Whether the objects are still required or not is a question to be put across to the BW team. If the temporary objects are removed when they are used by a query, then the query will fail.
Have a nice day
RB

Missing Tables and Indexes

Hi all,
we have checked "missing table and indexs" status with DBACOCKPIT and there it show 362 Indexes are not created.
all are the standard table indexes.
we have updated the indexes and statistics with BRCONNECT also.and its complited successfully.after this also "it show 362 Indexes are not created". we are using SOLARIS OS and oracle database.
Can anybody help me out how to rebuilt the missing indexes .....plz mention the steps.
Thanks,
Rableen khurana

Hi,
Refer to the note and lins on how to fix it
Note 1320008 - DBA Cockpit: Selection in "Missing Tables and Indexes"
http://wiki.sdn.sap.com/wiki/display/TechTSG/(DB)IndexReportedasMissing
http://help.sap.com/saphelp_nwpi711/helpdata/en/33/5b277b8b0745b8b60e67ca04c77ebb/content.htm
Thanks,
Arjun

Generate the tablespace clause for tables and indexes

How can I make Designer generate the tablespace clause for the create table and create index statements?
I assigned tables and indexes to Tablespaces objects in designer but they don't seem to have any effect on the generator.
I am using the latest version of Oracle Designer.
Thanks
Message was edited by:
bikerc

Guess I am not real clear what you want.
In the DB admin tab you will need to create the tablespace with the data file.
Then you need to assign the table space to the table.
You will need to generate from the DB Admin tab.
Hope this helps.
Michael

When rebuild table and index

Hi,
how to know if for a table we should rebuild table and index ?
Many thanks.

Safi, I would be less sure than that. There were many many very long threads in database general forum about that subject. If you observed that fact once, that is not very often the case.
@OP,
Assuming the question was not about performance, but more on AppDesigner side (because of rebuild table), what I can say is :
1. Peoplesoft store all the storage definition for all the objects in its own metamodel tables
2. when you are changing field definition (column's definition) or indexes definition, the new definition is stored in the Peoplesoft metamodel tables
3. On the table/index build, AppDesigner compare the Peoplesoft metamodel definition for that particular object with in the Oracle (or what ever else database you are using) definition of that same object.
4. If the defintions reported on step 3 are different, then AppDesigner will fill a file with all the (re)build statements of the objects you are rebuilding (and different).
5. Finally, you just have to run the generated script.
Of course, you can bypass the comparison by enforcing AppDesigner the (re)build the record/index in all cases, however, it is not always (do not say never) recommanded.
Now, when you have to rebuild table (or record in AppDesigner's word) or indexes ? Basically, by the previous explanation I gave above, you could understand this is when you are changing a field/table/index definition through AppDesigner.
Nicolas.

How to partition tables and indexes in this scenario?

So 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 -> B
we have 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 qualify A on either account or user or both. There are indexes (non partitioned) on these
We have a problem 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 but this isn't always possible.
We are wondering how we can benefit from partitioning and or sub partitioning table A. since it's partitioned on created_date but rarely qualify 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.
I am also wondering what impact pushing the state from A that's used to qualify A down to C would have any advantage.
C is the table that currently we qualify with the partition key so I figure if you also pushed down the state from A that's used to qualify the set of C's we want based on the set of B's we want based on the set of A thru qualfying on columns within A.
If we push down some of those values to C and simply use C when filtering I'm wondering what the plans will look like compared to having to work all the way up from the bottom to the top before it begins qualifying A.
Edited by: steffi on Jan 14, 2011 11:36 PM

We are wondering how we can benefit from partitioning and or sub partitioning table A. since it's partitioned on >created_date but rarely qualify by that. Very good question. Why did you partition on it? You will never have INSERTS on these partitions, but maybe deletes and updates? The only advantage (I can think of) would be to set these partitions in a read only tablespace to ease backup... but that's a weired reason.
we have 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.Of course. Why should they be partitioned by Create_date?
It is typical that we qualify A on either account or user or both. There are indexes (non partitioned) on these
We have a problem 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 but this isn't always possible.I would suspect full index scan. Isn't it?
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.As A is not accessed by any partition, why should C and B profit? You should look to partition by the key you are using to access. But, you are looking to tune your SQLs where the access is like '%ACCOUNT' on A. Then when there is a match. ORACLE joins via your index and nested loop (right?) to B and C.
I am also wondering what impact pushing the state from A that's used to qualify A down to C would have any >advantage.Why should it. It just makes the table and indexes larger => more IO.
C is the table that currently we qualify with the partition key so I figure if you also pushed down the state from A >that's used to qualify the set of C's we want based on the set of B's we want based on the set of A thru qualfying >on columns within A.If the access from A to C would be .. AND A.CREATE_DATE =C.CREATE_DATE and c.key like '%what I want%' which does not qualifify for a FK ;-) then, as that could be resulting in a partition scan, you could "profit". But, I'm sure that's not your model.
If we push down some of those values to C and simply use C when filtering I'm wondering what the plans will look >like compared to having to work all the way up from the bottom to the top before it begins qualifying A.So you want to denormalize A,B,C and into one table? With the same access is like '%ACCOUNT' you would get a full scan on an index as before, just the objects would be larger due to redundance and harder to maintain. In the end you would have a bad and slower design.
Maybe you explain what the problem is.
Full index scan can not be avoided, but that can be made faster by e.g. parallel query, and then the join to B and C should be a "snip" if you just identify a small subset of rows in these tables.

Limiting Tables and charts with Measures having RelativeValue

Hallo,
I just try to do some difficult stuff with the WebI Rich Client 4.1.
There are two measures for each month on a time line showing year and month. Thus, I have a dimension for year and month and two different measures for each year/month combination.
Now, e.g. I want to compare these two measures having same month and different years, say the current year and the year before. Please see the table below for a visible figure.
I used RelativeValue([measure prior year_1];([year/month]);-12) for [measure prior year] in order to compare one 1 year older measure with the other measure.
year/month
measure prior year
measure current year
2010/10
2010/11
2010/12
2011/01
2011/02
2011/03
2011/04
2011/05
2011/06
2011/07
2011/08
2011/09
2011/10
439
97
2011/11
7.294
2.712
2012/02
20.496
13.397
2012/05
21.859
12.636
2013/01
36.325
27.286
2014/08
26.894
17.425
There are no values for [measure current year] before 2011/10. But, there are values for [measure prior year_1] before 2011/10. [measure prior year] is actually from 2010/10, 2010/11 and so on, as defined with RelativeValue.
No problem here. Everything works fine. But, now, I want to start the table with the first row where [measure prior year] is not null while leaving measure current year unchanged. Just cut the table and start with 2011/10...
And here we get the problem. Hence, RelativeValue references to values before 2011/10 all these reference will disappear for [measure prior year].
The same is with charts. I couldn't find a way to reference to values that exist by the query but which are not displayed in a table or a chart!
What I need is a way to reference to values which are not present in a single table or chart but in the report. I already fiddled with the display options (null values, without dimension etc.) of tables. But, no way.
How could a accomplish this task?
Any idea of something like "hiding" unwanted rows/bars results in "loss of data".
Thanks for any help
Matthias

Well... if you think and try long enough, you may find the solution .
The core problem is to reference to queried values not shown in the table/chart. And there IS a solution.
Just use...
NoFilter(RelativeValue([measure prior year_1];([year/month]);-12))
... instead of
RelativeValue([measure prior year_1];([year/month]);-12)
NoFilter enables RelativeValue to reference to values not present in a table or chart, but available in the report .
From there on, you can define e.g. the starting point of the category axis of a chart by defining a local filter without losing values to be referenced .

How to find Fragmentation of tables and tablespaces in oracle 8i

Hi,
How can i measure the fragmentation of Tables and Tablespaces in oracle 8i.
Do any one have any handy script to find the same.
What are the attributes to be determined to do health checkup of a database.

how many such empty blocks are there in the table and of what size.Again Tom Kyte reference :
http://asktom.oracle.com/pls/ask/f?p=4950:8:7760471022221195640::NO::F4950_P8_DISPLAYID,F4950_P8_CRITERIA:231414051079
For tablespace, fragmentation is the regular termAbout tablespace, the link from post above can help.
Nicolas.

Report to find all table and index sizes

Hi all,
Good day..
Is there any report.sql or so to find out the sizes of all the tables and indexes in a database.
thanks,
baskar.l

1.To get table size
What will be the table size if?
<or>
break on report
set line 200
COMPUTE SUM LABEL "Total Reclaimable Space" OF "KB Free Space" ON REPORT
column "Table Size" Format a20
column "Actual Data Size" Format a20
column "KB Free Space" Format "9,99,999.99"
select table_name,
round((blocks*8),2)||'kb' "Table size",
round((num_rows*avg_row_len/1024),2)||'kb' "Actual Data size",
pct_free,
round((blocks*8),2) - (round((blocks*8),2)*pct_free/100) - (round((num_rows*avg_row_len/1024),2)) "KB Free Space"
from user_tables
where round((blocks*8),2) - (round((blocks*8),2)*pct_free/100) - (round((num_rows*avg_row_len/1024),2)) > 0
order by round((blocks*8),2) - (round((blocks*8),2)*pct_free/100) - (round((num_rows*avg_row_len/1024),2)) desc
2.To get index size
How to size the Index
Hth
Girish Sharma

Missing Tables and Indexes in 3.5

Hi,
when i am executing Tcode DB02 then under Missing Tables and Indexes i find 35 Indexes as not created.
can anybody tell me what does that signify. is this a issue if so how to fix it.
Indexes not created
ADCP-I04
ADCP-I03
ADCP-I02
ADCP-I01
ADCPS-I01
ADCPS-I02
ADCPS-I03
ADCPS-I04
ADRC-I14
ADRC-I11
ADRC-I05
ADRC-I02
ADRC-G
ADRP-I01
ADRP-I02
ADRP-I03
ADRP-I04
ADRP-I07
ADRP-I08
ADRP-I09
ADRV-I01
BUT000-PER
CDHDR-001
CDHDR-002
CRMD_ORDERADM_I-PKI
CRMD_ORDERADM_I-DES
ISSUE_RELATION-001
NAST-ADQ
RMPS_T_RESUB-RAG
RMPS_T_RESUB-RCU
SSPICSPRHD-S02
SSPICSTRHEAD-S01
SSPICSTRPL-FLD
STXH-TDN
SWBRULECOM-RSY
Rakesh

Hi Rakesh,
First thing this is not an issue but an information that says that these indexes are not be created in the System.
This option Indexes not created is an SAP table maintained from Dev to Prod just to indicate that these indexes cannot be created.
That's the reason why u have a green mark beside them and this will make clear for you that this is not an issue.
Hope it helps!!!!
Thanks & Regards,
Neelesh Jain.

BW DB13 Tables and indexes missing

hi, everyone,
our team find a strangethings in DB02 about the growth of table space, there is even no any growth, and it keeps about two months. and then we found that in tables and indexes all table about BW like *ODSD, *FACTD, *DIMD are missing!
I only find DB13C appear the error as" REOGR CHK for All Tables" at the same time .
please tell me why I can't find BW tables ? is there any relations between tables missing and job calendar?
our level is 701, and database is DB6.

It's a fool questions, i found the reason is so easy^^

Fragmentation in tables and indexes with 9.2.0.5

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for