Oracle Text Wizard

Issue:
The JDeveloper - Oracle Text Wizard, does not work on
JDeveloper 9.0.5.1
Any clue?
Thank you
http://otn.oracle.com/software/products/text/text.html

I believe that extension was built for JDeveloper 9.0.4. The extension API changed slightly after 9.0.4, so it may not work in 9.0.5.1.
You might want to check on the database forums to see if they have any plans to update this extension.
-SteveA

Similar Messages

Oracle Text Wizard - JDeveloper

Issue:
The JDeveloper - Oracle Text Wizard, does not work on
JDeveloper 9.0.5.1
Any clue?
Thank you
http://otn.oracle.com/software/products/text/text.html

You may want to try posting this question on the Jdeveloper forum
Forums Home » Oracle Technology Network (OTN) » Products » Developer Suite » JDeveloper

Oracle Text Wizards (CatSearch)

Will the Oracle Text wizards (CatSearch and Text search) be made available for JDeveloper 10g? When? If not, what did they do and how could I recreate manually? Thanks.

Is there any ETA.
I have to work out a POC for a customer and the only have 905 JDeveloper. When will this extension be available.

Oracle Text and webDAV

Hello, I am using Portal 9.0.2.6.
I have many html items which were added through the webDAV interface. My Oracle Text search doesn't seem to pick them up. The Oracle Text search is picking up items which were added through the Portal wizard interface, so I believe Text is working.
Should it be working with the webDAV objects too?
Thanks.

Are these same HTML files searchable when you uploaded them as Portal file items through the browser?
Look at the ctx_user_index_errors view in the Portal repository schema. Are there indexing errors for the HTML files? It sounds like you are familiar with Oracle Text but if not take a look at the Portal Configuration Guide. If you don't have this to hand you can find it on Portal Center. There's a section on Search which includes all of the behind the scenes configuration of Oracle Text with Portal.

Oracle Text:Problems in starting

hi all
i am working on Oracle 10g in windows and i want to do Text Mining,but i am having some problems.when i use the JDeveloper and start the text wizard it createa a jsp file but it is not loading properly.is there any document from which i can learn how to do it.i think i missed out some configurations for the http server.i really need it very soon.
thanks in advance

hello
i had followed the tutorial "Building JSP Applications that Use Oracle Text to Search Content in the Database using JDeveloper" and using that now i am able to load the jsp file but cant search as it shows the following error.
The requested method POST is not allowed for the URL /textsearch/mysearch.jsp.
i dont know what is the problem.can u help me.i am using Oracle 10g and i have added a Alias in the httpd.conf instead of the ojsp.conf file that has been mentioned in the tutorial as there is no such file in 10g.can u help me

Announcement - New JDeveloper Text wizards

The Text and Catalog Search Wizards are add-ins for JDeveloper9i which provide a menu-driven interface for generating simple Text and Catalog Search applications.
The source code is generated through JDeveloper and can be easily modified.
You can download the wizards from the Text page (otn.oracle.com/products/text -> software).
There is an OBE lesson that shows how to use them: http://otn.oracle.com/products/oracle9i/htdocs/9iober2/obe9ir2/obe-cnt/html/jdevtext/jdevtext.htm

Hi,
has anyone tried to use the Text Wizard using the OC4J Server in JDeveloper9i (v 9.0.3)?
I've followed the OBE lesson instructions to the letter (many times!) but omitting the Apache alias setup.
I get Error 404 every time.
Any suggestions?
Brian

Jdeveloper text wizard

Hi,
I installed text wizard add-in like it explained in : http://www.oracle.com/technology/software/products/text/text.html but when i restart jdeveloper i dont find text wizard, what can i do please ?.
thanks

Just as an aside, how do you use Text Wizard in JDeveloper 10g? Whilst I can create the jsp pages and the SQL scripts, I can't get them to run. I guess my real question is when ' when do you invoke the wizard?' - do you need an application workspace, workspace, project, model, viewcontroller, etc.?
The OBE makes it look really easy but refers to JDeveloper 9i and doesn't seem to relate to 10g.
Any help would be much appreciated.
Brian

Text Wizard for Jdeveloper 11g

Hy,
I am using JDeveloper to create an application, and I need Text Wizard, Can anyone tell me if I can install Text Wizard on Jdeveloper 11? If yes, how can i do it.
Thank you.

The only place you'd be able to get it would be via Oracle Support https://support.oracle.com and filing an SR. However, any application that you might develop with 9.0.5 and that wizard would most definitely not be using the latest technology, so I'm not sure how useful it's going to be.
John

How do I get Oracle Text to index files on a file server?

I am new to Oracle (I'm a MS-SQL DBA looking for a Full-Text Search solution that is better than linking to a MS index server.)
So - Here's the objective:
I have Oracle Server(Express) installed on a Windows server.
I would like for Oracle to build a Full-Text Catalog of the files on a separate file server based on file paths in a table in the database.
(No desire to store terabytes of images and documents inside the database)
I can get Oracle text up and running, using the URL_Datastore:
CREATE TABLE files (id NUMBER PRIMARY KEY, issue_id NUMBER, path VARCHAR(255) UNIQUE, ot_format VARCHAR(6), ot_version VARCHAR(10));
The Compaq server is a remote windows server on my local workgroup, so the fully qualified path is just "compaq" and the URL is valid:
INSERT INTO files VALUES (9,9,'file://Compaq/FTQ/00000003.pdf',NULL,NULL);
INSERT INTO files VALUES (13,13,'file://Compaq/FTQ/01.txt',NULL,NULL);
CREATE INDEX file_index ON files(path) INDEXTYPE IS ctxsys.context
PARAMETERS ('datastore ctxsys.URL_DATASTORE format column ot_format');
but when I enter:
Select * from CTX_User_Index_errors, I see the following errors:
DRG-11609: URL store: unable to open local file specified by file://Compaq/FTQ/00000003.pdf
DRG-11609: URL store: unable to open local file specified by file://Compaq/FTQ/01.txt
Did I miss something?
Do I need to install anything on the file server?
I would like to convince my company that Oracle can be much quicker than Microsoft's Indexing Service because it can avoid joining two large result sets (one result set from Full_text (indexing service) and one for specific data contained in fields in the MS-SQL database.) Full Text Searches commonly take 40 - 60 seconds where there are 1.5 million multi-page PDF files for a particular set that I sample search on. Without this massive join, I believe I can get the search to run in under 10 seconds.

Thank you!
File_Datastore worked fine.
I was staying away from File_Datastore because the information I gathered from googling suggested that file_datastore would only work locally.
Now I just have to get Oracle to pull data out of tables in a MS-SQL database on the local network (don't have a clue yet), and then have it index compiled file paths.
Then MS-SQL can query Oracle with index and full-text criteria and Oracle can send back a result set
It may sound like a bad way of performing Full-Text Queries, but anything will be better than the way things are currently running. We are currently performing Full Text Searches on a table that is rebuilt nightly, so the table containing millions of file paths is not live..
It would be so much better if we just migrated to Oracle, but we currently do not have the resources.

Error while running the Oracle Text optimize index procedure (even as a dba user too)

Hi Experts,
I am on Oracle on 11.2.0.2 on Linux. I have implemented Oracle Text. My Oracle Text indexes are fragmented but I am getting an error while running the optimize_index error. Following is the error:
begin
ctx_ddl.optimize_index(idx_name=>'ACCESS_T1',optlevel=>'FULL');
end;
ERROR at line 1:
ORA-20000: Oracle Text error:
ORA-06512: at "CTXSYS.DRUE", line 160
ORA-06512: at "CTXSYS.CTX_DDL", line 941
ORA-06512: at line 1
Now I tried then to run this as DBA user too and it failed the same way!
begin
ctx_ddl.optimize_index(idx_name=>'BVSCH1.ACCESS_T1',optlevel=>'FULL');
end;
ERROR at line 1:
ORA-20000: Oracle Text error:
ORA-06512: at "CTXSYS.DRUE", line 160
ORA-06512: at "CTXSYS.CTX_DDL", line 941
ORA-06512: at line 1
Now CTXAPP role is granted to my schema and still I am getting this error. I will be thankful for the suggestions.
Also one other important observation: We have this issue ONLY in one database and in the other two databases, I don't see any problem at all.
I am unable to figure out what the issue is with this one database!
Thanks,
OrauserN

How about check the following?
Bug 10626728 - CTX_DDL.optimize_index "full" fails with an empty ORA-20000 since 11.2.0.2 upgrade (DOCID 10626728.8)

Getting error while importing schema with ORACLE TEXT

IMP-00003: ORACLE error 20000 encountered
ORA-20000: Oracle Text error:
DRG-52204: error while registering index
DRG-10507: duplicate index name: WORKORDER_Q, owner: SYS
ORA-06512: at "CTXSYS.DRUE", line 160
ORA-06512: at "CTXSYS.DRIIMP", line 115
ORA-06512: at line 2
IMP-00088: Problem importing metadata for index WORKORDER_Q. Index creation will be skipped
Database version - Oracle Database 11g Enterprise Edition Release 11.2.0.3.0 - 64bit Production
Os version - Linux nlxs1012.slb.atosorigin-asp.com 2.6.18-308.el5 #1 SMP Fri Jan 27 17:17:51 EST 2012 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
We have take export of schema from production db now importing data to qa environment..
In import facing above error..

I am importing objects from P20_MAXIMO to Q25_MAXIMO to another database..
Below is import par file..
USERID='/ as sysdba'
FILE=exp_P20_MAXIMO_C2364781.dmp
LOG=imp_P20_MAXIMO__Q25_MAXIMO_C2364781_1.log
FROMUSER=P20_MAXIMO
TOUSER=Q25_MAXIMO
buffer=1000000
feedback=100000
Export parfile
userid='/ as sysdba'
owner=P20_MAXIMO
FILE=exp_P20_MAXIMO_C2364781.dmp
LOG=exp_P20_MAXIMO_C2364781.log
buffer=10000000
feedback=100000
statistics=none

Pre-loading Oracle text in memory with Oracle 12c

There is a white paper from Roger Ford that explains how to load the Oracle index in memory : http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/database/enterprise-edition/mem-load-082296.html
In our application, Oracle 12c, we are indexing a big XML field (which is stored as XMLType with storage secure file) with the PATH_SECTION_GROUP. If I don't load the I table (DR$..$I) into memory using the technique explained in the white paper then I cannot have decent performance (and especially not predictable performance, it looks like if the blocks from the TOKEN_INFO columns are not memory then performance can fall sharply)
But after migrating to oracle 12c, I got a different problem, which I can reproduce: when I create the index it is relatively small (as seen with ctx_report.index_size) and by applying the technique from the whitepaper, I can pin the DR$ I table into memory. But as soon as I do a ctx_ddl.optimize_index('Index','REBUILD') the size becomes much bigger and I can't pin the index in memory. Not sure if it is bug or not.
What I found as work-around is to build the index with the following storage options:
ctx_ddl.create_preference('TEST_STO','BASIC_STORAGE');
ctx_ddl.set_attribute ('TEST_STO', 'BIG_IO', 'YES' );
ctx_ddl.set_attribute ('TEST_STO', 'SEPARATE_OFFSETS', 'NO' );
so that the token_info column will be stored in a secure file. Then I can change the storage of that column to put it in the keep buffer cache, and write a procedure to read the LOB so that it will be loaded in the keep cache. The size of the LOB column is more or less the same as when creating the index without the BIG_IO option but it remains constant even after a ctx_dll.optimize_index. The procedure to read the LOB and to load it into the cache is very similar to the loaddollarR procedure from the white paper.
Because of the SDATA section, there is a new DR table (S table) and an IOT on top of it. This is not documented in the white paper (the white paper was written for Oracle 10g). In my case this DR$ S table is much used, and the IOT also, but putting it in the keep cache is not as important as the token_info column of the DR I table. A final note: doing SEPARATE_OFFSETS = 'YES' was very bad in my case, the combined size of the two columns is much bigger than having only the TOKEN_INFO column and both columns are read.
Here is an example on how to reproduce the problem with the size increasing when doing ctx_optimize
1. create the table
drop table test;
CREATE TABLE test
(ID NUMBER(9,0) NOT NULL ENABLE,
XML_DATA XMLTYPE
XMLTYPE COLUMN XML_DATA STORE AS SECUREFILE BINARY XML (tablespace users disable storage in row);
2. insert a few records
insert into test values(1,'<Book><TITLE>Tale of Two Cities</TITLE>It was the best of times.<Author NAME="Charles Dickens"> Born in England in the town, Stratford_Upon_Avon </Author></Book>');
insert into test values(2,'<BOOK><TITLE>The House of Mirth</TITLE>Written in 1905<Author NAME="Edith Wharton"> Wharton was born to George Frederic Jones and Lucretia Stevens Rhinelander in New York City.</Author></BOOK>');
insert into test values(3,'<BOOK><TITLE>Age of innocence</TITLE>She got a prize for it.<Author NAME="Edith Wharton"> Wharton was born to George Frederic Jones and Lucretia Stevens Rhinelander in New York City.</Author></BOOK>');
3. create the text index
drop index i_test;
exec ctx_ddl.create_section_group('TEST_SGP','PATH_SECTION_GROUP');
begin
CTX_DDL.ADD_SDATA_SECTION(group_name => 'TEST_SGP',
                            section_name => 'SData_02',
                            tag => 'SData_02',
                            datatype => 'varchar2');
end;
exec ctx_ddl.create_preference('TEST_STO','BASIC_STORAGE');
exec ctx_ddl.set_attribute('TEST_STO','I_TABLE_CLAUSE','tablespace USERS storage (initial 64K)');
exec ctx_ddl.set_attribute('TEST_STO','I_INDEX_CLAUSE','tablespace USERS storage (initial 64K) compress 2');
exec ctx_ddl.set_attribute ('TEST_STO', 'BIG_IO', 'NO' );
exec ctx_ddl.set_attribute ('TEST_STO', 'SEPARATE_OFFSETS', 'NO' );
create index I_TEST
on TEST (XML_DATA)
indextype is ctxsys.context
parameters('
    section group   "TEST_SGP"
    storage         "TEST_STO"
') parallel 2;
4. check the index size
select ctx_report.index_size('I_TEST') from dual;
it says :
TOTALS FOR INDEX TEST.I_TEST
TOTAL BLOCKS ALLOCATED:                                                104
TOTAL BLOCKS USED:                                                      72
TOTAL BYTES ALLOCATED:                                 851,968 (832.00 KB)
TOTAL BYTES USED:                                      589,824 (576.00 KB)
4. optimize the index
exec ctx_ddl.optimize_index('I_TEST','REBUILD');
and now recompute the size, it says
TOTALS FOR INDEX TEST.I_TEST
TOTAL BLOCKS ALLOCATED:                                               1112
TOTAL BLOCKS USED:                                                    1080
TOTAL BYTES ALLOCATED:                                 9,109,504 (8.69 MB)
TOTAL BYTES USED:                                      8,847,360 (8.44 MB)
which shows that it went from 576KB to 8.44MB. With a big index the difference is not so big, but still from 14G to 19G.
5. Workaround: use the BIG_IO option, so that the token_info column of the DR$ I table will be stored in a secure file and the size will stay relatively small. Then you can load this column in the cache using a procedure similar to
alter table DR$I_TEST$I storage (buffer_pool keep);
alter table dr$i_test$i modify lob(token_info) (cache storage (buffer_pool keep));
rem: now we must read the lob so that it will be loaded in the keep buffer pool, use the prccedure below
create or replace procedure loadTokenInfo is
type c_type is ref cursor;
c2 c_type;
s varchar2(2000);
b blob;
buff varchar2(100);
siz number;
off number;
cntr number;
begin
    s := 'select token_info from DR$i_test$I';
    open c2 for s;
    loop
       fetch c2 into b;
       exit when c2%notfound;
       siz := 10;
       off := 1;
       cntr := 0;
       if dbms_lob.getlength(b) > 0 then
         begin
           loop
             dbms_lob.read(b, siz, off, buff);
             cntr := cntr + 1;
             off := off + 4096;
           end loop;
         exception when no_data_found then
           if cntr > 0 then
             dbms_output.put_line('4K chunks fetched: '||cntr);
           end if;
         end;
       end if;
    end loop;
end;
Rgds, Pierre

I have been working a lot on that issue recently, I can give some more info.
First I totally agree with you, I don't like to use the keep_pool and I would love to avoid it. On the other hand, we have a specific use case : 90% of the activity in the DB is done by queuing and dbms_scheduler jobs where response time does not matter. All those processes are probably filling the buffer cache. We have a customer facing application that uses the text index to search the database : performance is critical for them.
What kind of performance do you have with your application ?
In my case, I have learned the hard way that having the index in memory (the DR$I table in fact) is the key : if it is not, then performance is poor. I find it reasonable to pin the DR$I table in memory and if you look at competitors this is what they do. With MongoDB they explicitly says that the index must be in memory. With elasticsearch, they use JVM's that are also in memory. And effectively, if you look at the awr report, you will see that Oracle is continuously accessing the DR$I table, there is a SQL similar to
SELECT /*+ DYNAMIC_SAMPLING(0) INDEX(i) */
TOKEN_FIRST, TOKEN_LAST, TOKEN_COUNT, ROWID
FROM DR$idxname$I
WHERE TOKEN_TEXT = :word AND TOKEN_TYPE = :wtype
ORDER BY TOKEN_TEXT, TOKEN_TYPE, TOKEN_FIRST
which is continuously done.
I think that the algorithm used by Oracle to keep blocks in cache is too complex. A just realized that in 12.1.0.2 (was released last week) there is finally a "killer" functionality, the in-memory parameters, with which you can pin tables or columns in memory with compression, etc. this looks ideal for the text index, I hope that R. Ford will finally update his white paper :-)
But my other problem was that the optimize_index in REBUILD mode caused the DR$I table to double in size : it seems crazy that this was closed as not a bug but it was and I can't do anything about it. It is a bug in my opinion, because the create index command and "alter index rebuild" command both result in a much smaller index, so why would the guys that developped the optimize function (is it another team, using another algorithm ?) make the index two times bigger ?
And for that the track I have been following is to put the index in a 16K tablespace : in this case the space used by the index remains more or less flat (increases but much more reasonably). The difficulty here is to pin the index in memory because the trick of R. Ford was not working anymore.
What worked:
first set the keep_pool to zero and set the db_16k_cache_size to instead. Then change the storage preference to make sure that everything you want to cache (mostly the DR$I) table come in the tablespace with the non-standard block size of 16k.
Then comes the tricky part : the pre-loading of the data in the buffer cache. The problem is that with Oracle 12c, Oracle will use direct_path_read for FTS which basically means that it bypasses the cache and read directory from file to the PGA !!! There is an event to avoid that, I was lucky to find it on a blog (I can't remember which, sorry for the credit).
I ended-up doing that. the events to 10949 is to avoid the direct path reads issue.
alter session set events '10949 trace name context forever, level 1';
alter table DR#idxname0001$I cache;
alter table DR#idxname0002$I cache;
alter table DR#idxname0003$I cache;
SELECT /*+ FULL(ITAB) CACHE(ITAB) */ SUM(TOKEN_COUNT), SUM(LENGTH(TOKEN_INFO)) FROM DR#idxname0001$I;
SELECT /*+ FULL(ITAB) CACHE(ITAB) */ SUM(TOKEN_COUNT), SUM(LENGTH(TOKEN_INFO)) FROM DR#idxname0002$I;
SELECT /*+ FULL(ITAB) CACHE(ITAB) */ SUM(TOKEN_COUNT), SUM(LENGTH(TOKEN_INFO)) FROM DR#idxname0003$I;
SELECT /*+ INDEX(ITAB) CACHE(ITAB) */ SUM(LENGTH(TOKEN_TEXT)) FROM DR#idxname0001$I ITAB;
SELECT /*+ INDEX(ITAB) CACHE(ITAB) */ SUM(LENGTH(TOKEN_TEXT)) FROM DR#idxname0002$I ITAB;
SELECT /*+ INDEX(ITAB) CACHE(ITAB) */ SUM(LENGTH(TOKEN_TEXT)) FROM DR#idxname0003$I ITAB;
It worked. With a big relief I expected to take some time out, but there was a last surprise. The command
exec ctx_ddl.optimize_index(idx_name=>'idxname',part_name=>'partname',optlevel=>'REBUILD');
gqve the following
ERROR at line 1:
ORA-20000: Oracle Text error:
DRG-50857: oracle error in drftoptrebxch
ORA-14097: column type or size mismatch in ALTER TABLE EXCHANGE PARTITION
ORA-06512: at "CTXSYS.DRUE", line 160
ORA-06512: at "CTXSYS.CTX_DDL", line 1141
ORA-06512: at line 1
Which is very much exactly described in a metalink note 1645634.1 but in the case of a non-partitioned index. The work-around given seemed very logical but it did not work in the case of a partitioned index. After experimenting, I found out that the bug occurs when the partitioned index is created with dbms_pclxutil.build_part_index procedure (this enables enables intra-partition parallelism in the index creation process). This is a very annoying and stupid bug, maybe there is a work-around, but did not find it on metalink
Other points of attention with the text index creation (stuff that surprised me at first !) ;
- if you use the dbms_pclxutil package, then the ctx_output logging does not work, because the index is created immediately and then populated in the background via dbms_jobs.
- this in combination with the fact that if you are on a RAC, you won't see any activity on the box can be very frightening : this is because oracle can choose to start the workers on the other node.
I understand much better how the text indexing works, I think it is a great technology which can scale via partitioning. But like always the design of the application is crucial, most of our problems come from the fact that we did not choose the right sectioning (we choosed PATH_SECTION_GROUP while XML_SECTION_GROUP is so much better IMO). Maybe later I can convince the dev to change the sectionining, especially because SDATA and MDATA section are not supported with PATCH_SECTION_GROUP (although it seems to work, even though we had one occurence of a bad result linked to the existence of SDATA in the index definition). Also the whole problematic of mixed structured/unstructured searches is completly tackled if one use XML_SECTION_GROUP with MDATA/SDATA (but of course the app was written for Oracle 10...)
Regards, Pierre

Suggestion: Oracle text CONTEXT index on one or more columns ?

Hi,
I'm implementing Oracle text using CONTEXT ..... and would like to ask you for performance suggestion ...
I have a table of Articles .... with columns .. TITLE, SUBTITLE , BODY ...
Now is it better from performance point of view to move all three columns into one dummy column ... with name like FULLTEXT ... and put index on this single column,
and then use CONTAINS(FULLTEXT,'...')>0
Or is it almost the same for oracle if i put indexes on all three columns and then call:
CONTAINS(TITLE,'...')>0 OR CONTAINS(SUBTITLE,'...')>0 OR CONTAINS(BODY,'...')>0
I actually don't care if the result is a match in TITLE OR SUBTITLE OR BODY ....
So if i move into some FULLTEXT column, then i have duplicate data in a article row ... but if i create indexes for each column, than oracle has 2x more to index,optimize and search ... am I wright ?
Table has 1.8mil records ...
Thank you.
Kris

mackrispi wrote:
Now is it better from performance point of view to move all three columns into one dummy column ... with name like FULLTEXT ... and put index on this single column,
and then use CONTAINS(FULLTEXT,'...')>0What version of Oracle are you on? If 11 then you could use a virtual column to do this, otherwise you'd have to write code to maintain the column which can get messy.
mackrispi wrote:
Or is it almost the same for oracle if i put indexes on all three columns and then call:
CONTAINS(TITLE,'...')>0 OR CONTAINS(SUBTITLE,'...')>0 OR CONTAINS(BODY,'...')>0Benchmark it and find out :)
Another option would be something like this.
http://asktom.oracle.com/pls/asktom/f?p=100:11:0::::P11_QUESTION_ID:9455353124561
Were i you, i would try out those 3 approaches and see which meet your performance requirements and weigh that with the ease of implementation and administration.

ERROR at line 1: ORA-29855: error occurred in the execution of ODCIINDEXCREATE routine ORA-20000: Oracle Text error: DRG-10700: preference does not exist: global_lexer ORA-06512: at "CTXSYS.DRUE", line 160 ORA-06512: at "CTXSYS.TEXTINDEXMETHODS", line 366

database version 11.2.0.4
rac two node
CREATE INDEX MAXIMO.ACTCI_NDX3 ON MAXIMO.ACTCI
(DESCRIPTION)
INDEXTYPE IS CTXSYS.CONTEXT
PARAMETERS('lexer global_lexer language column LANGCODE')
ERROR at line 1:
ORA-29855: error occurred in the execution of ODCIINDEXCREATE routine
ORA-20000: Oracle Text error:
DRG-10700: preference does not exist: global_lexer
ORA-06512: at "CTXSYS.DRUE", line 160
ORA-06512: at "CTXSYS.TEXTINDEXMETHODS", line 366

Like the error message says, you don't have a global_lexer. So, you need to create a global_lexer and that lexer must have at least a default sub_lexer, then you can use that global_lexer in your index parameters. Please see the demonstration below, including reproduction of the error and solution.
SCOTT@orcl12c> -- reproduction of problem:
SCOTT@orcl12c> CREATE TABLE actci
2    (description VARCHAR2(60),
3      langcode     VARCHAR2(30))
4 /
Table created.
SCOTT@orcl12c> CREATE INDEX ACTCI_NDX3 ON ACTCI (DESCRIPTION)
2 INDEXTYPE IS CTXSYS.CONTEXT
3 PARAMETERS('lexer global_lexer language column LANGCODE')
4 /
CREATE INDEX ACTCI_NDX3 ON ACTCI (DESCRIPTION)
ERROR at line 1:
ORA-29855: error occurred in the execution of ODCIINDEXCREATE routine
ORA-20000: Oracle Text error:
DRG-10700: preference does not exist: global_lexer
ORA-06512: at "CTXSYS.DRUE", line 160
ORA-06512: at "CTXSYS.TEXTINDEXMETHODS", line 366
SCOTT@orcl12c> -- solution:
SCOTT@orcl12c> DROP INDEX actci_ndx3
2 /
Index dropped.
SCOTT@orcl12c> BEGIN
2    CTX_DDL.CREATE_PREFERENCE ('global_lexer', 'multi_lexer');
3    CTX_DDL.CREATE_PREFERENCE ('english_lexer', 'basic_lexer');
4    CTX_DDL.ADD_SUB_LEXER ('global_lexer', 'default', 'english_lexer');
5 END;
6 /
PL/SQL procedure successfully completed.
SCOTT@orcl12c> CREATE INDEX ACTCI_NDX3 ON ACTCI (DESCRIPTION)
2 INDEXTYPE IS CTXSYS.CONTEXT
3 PARAMETERS('lexer global_lexer language column LANGCODE')
4 /
Index created.

Upgrading Oracle Text - Post upgrade step 10.2 to 11.2

I already upgraded my 10.2.0.4 database to 11.2.0.1 and have to do post upgrade steps. In step 39 of Manual guideline (837570.1) is not clear for me. If some one can explain further would be appriciated. When i check my source ORACLE_HOME/ctx/admin/ctxf102.txt or ctxf102.sql
Step 39
Upgrading Oracle Text
Copy the following files from the previous Oracle home to the new Oracle home:
* Stemming user-dictionary files
* User-modified KOREAN_MORPH_LEXER dictionary files
* USER_FILTER executables
To obtain a list of the above files, use:
$ORACLE_HOME/ctx/admin/ctxf<version>.txt
$ORACLE_HOME/ctx/admin/ctxf<version>.sql
where version is 920,101,102
For instance, if upgrading from 10.2.0
*1. For dictionary files check*
*$ORACLE_HOME/ctx/admin/ctxf102.txt*
*2. Execute the script as database user SYS,SYSTEM, or CTXSYS*
*$ORACLE_HOME/ctx/admin/ctxf102.sql*
If your Oracle Text index uses KOREAN_LEXER which was deprecated in Oracle 9i and desupported in Oracle 10g Release 2, see below Note for further information on manual migration from KOREAN_LEXER to KOREAN_MORPH_LEXER.
Note 300172.1 Obsolescence of KOREAN_LEXER Lexer Type

Hi Srini
Thank you very much. now i got it.
Oracle asked me to identify the CTXCAT indexes with KOREAN_LEXER execute the following query as user CTXSYS: if nothing return then i can skip this step.
SELECT idx_name
FROM ctxsys.ctx_indexes
WHERE idx_type = 'CTXCAT'
AND idx_name IN
(SELECT ixo_index_name
FROM ctxsys.ctx_index_objects
WHERE ixo_class = 'LEXER'
AND ixo_object = 'KOREAN_MORPH_LEXER ');
SELECT isl_index_owner,isl_index_name,isl_language
FROM CTXSYS.ctx_index_sub_lexers
WHERE isl_object = 'KOREAN_MORPH_LEXER';

Oracle Text Wizard

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for