Table and index in the same tablespace

I have a table and its associated indexes all in one tablespace. Now, will creating a separate tablespace just for the indexes and drop and recreating the indexes the table has in the new tablespace help ???
Thanks

In all probability, no. This may have some housekeeping/ recovery benefits but it is very unlikely to have performance benefits. Most modern disk arrays are configured so that data access is spread pretty evenly across all the spindles. If your disk is configured such that you have "hot" and "cold" disks, and if you can move the index to a different tablespace that can be placed on one of the "cold" disks, this will tend to balance out disk I/O and may improve performance.
Justin
Distributed Database Consulting, Inc.
http://www.ddbcinc.com/askDDBC

Similar Messages

Import data from few tables and export into the same tables on different db

I want to import data from few tables and export into the same tables on different database. But on the target database, additional columns have been added
to the same tables. how can i do the import?
Its urgent can anyone please help me do this?
Thanks.

Hello Junior DBA,
maybe try it with the "copy command".
http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/B14117_01/server.101/b12170/apb.htm
Have a look at the section "Understanding COPY Command Syntax".
Here is an example of a COPY command that copies only two columns from the source table, and copies only those rows in which the value of DEPARTMENT_ID is 30:Regards
Stefan

How to group Table and Graph in the same section in OBIEE 11g

Hi,
I have a requirement of showing the table and graphs together for various products in different section. For example, for Product A, the table and graph would be displayed together and after product A, the table and graph for product B should be displayed.
I have tried using section but it creates the seperate section for tables and Graphs. Is there a way that we can put the section on table and graph together.
Thanks.

By any chance are you using a pivot table? If so, you can "Graph Pivoted Results". (When you're editing the pivot table, it's the last button at the top/middle of the page.) Then you can use the products column to break the pivot into sections and you'll have a pivot table and graph per section.
JB

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

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

CDS-18010 Error:A Index and a index with the same name

Hi
I am facing strange error is some one expert there to help me to get rid of this error.
CDS-18010 Error:A Index and a index with the same name 'LA_SP_FK_1' have been asked to be created.
I am generating tables from Data model diagram & getting this error.
Thanks,
Vijay

Your Right!!
Designer does not like 2 of the same name.
there are several bugs on the same name issue and CDS-18010
Bug.3973155/3443005 (92) CDS-18010 IN CAPTURING A TYPE WITH CONSTRUCTOR FUNTIONS IN ITS BODY:
Bug.2586582 (93) CDS-18010 A DOMAIN AND A DOMAIN WITH THE SAME NAME 'D1' BEEN ASKED TO CREATE:
Bug.2561625 (15) CDS-18010 GENERATION OF TWO SYNONYMS WITH SAME NAME BUT DIFFERENT SCOPE:
Bug.2072505 (93) CDS-18010 CAPTURING 2 TRIGGERS WITH SAME NAME ON ONE TABLE SHOULD BE A WARNING:
Bug.1689800 (90) CDS-18010 PLSQL WITH THE SAME PROCEDURE NAME ALREADY EXISTS:
Bug.1073311/1029997 (96) CDS-18010 ERROR ATTEMPTING TO CREATE 2 PROCEDURES WITH SAME NAME:
Just to name a few.
I would suggest you change the name.
Michael

Reorganization of tablespaces, tables and indexes.

Hello Experts,
What is the concept of tablespaces, statistics , tables and indexes in SAP/Oracle ? Where are they used and what are they meant for ?
Wt is the concept and procedure of performing Reorganization of tablespaces, tables and indexes ? why do we need it for ?
Requested to revertb at earliest as its urgent . points guaranteed .
Regards,
Somya

Hello Somya,
Probably difficult to explain entire information in this thread. But you definately get good information in the following link
http://help.sap.com/saphelp_47x200/helpdata/en/0d/d2fafd4a0c11d182b80000e829fbfe/frameset.htm
Please drill down through menus, and you will be able to get good information.
Also you can check the following SAP notes
666061     FAQ: Database objects, segments and extents
912620     FAQ: Oracle indexes
588668     FAQ: Database statistics
592393     FAQ: Oracle
541538     FAQ: Reorganizations
Regards,
Madhukar

How to read the data file and write into the same file without a temp table

Hi,
I have a requirement as below:
We are running lockbox process for several business, but for a few businesses we have requirement where in we receive a flat file in different format other than how the transmission format is defined.
This is a 10.7 to 11.10 migration. In 10.7 the users are using a custom table into which they are first loading the raw data and writing a pl/sql validation on that and loading it into a new flat file and then running the lockbox process.
But in 11.10 we want to restrict using temp table how can we achieve this.
Can we read the file first and then do validations accordingly and then write to the same file and process the lockbox.
Any inputs are highly appreciated.
Thanks & Regards,
Lakshmi Kalyan Vara Prasad.

Hello Gurus,
Let me tell you about my requirement clearly with an example.
Problem:
i am receiving a dat file from bank in below format
105A371273020563007 07030415509174REF3178503 001367423860020015E129045
in this detail 1 record starting from 38th character to next 15 characters is merchant reference number
REF3178503 --- REF denotes it as Sales Order
ACC denotes it as Customer No
INV denotes it as Transaction Number
based on this 15 characters......my validation comes.
If i see REF i need to pick that complete record and then fill that record with the SO details as per my system and then submit the file for lockbox processing.
In 10.7 they created a temporary table into which they are loading the data using a control file....once the data is loaded into the temporary table then they are doing a validation and updating the record exactly as required and then creating one another file and then submitting the file for lockbox processing.
Where as in 11.10 they want to bypass these temporary tables and writing it into a different file.
Can this be handled by writing a pl/sql procedure ??
My findings:
May be i am wrong.......but i think .......if we first get the data into ar_payments_interface_all table and then do the validations and then complete the lockbox process may help.
Any suggestions from Oracle GURUS is highly appreciated.
Thanks & Regards,
Lakshmi Kalyan Vara Prasad.

After move tables and index another tablespace, indexes got unusable?

Hi,
I moved table and indexes another tablespace. After move many indexes got unusable state. I couldn't understand thiis?
How can I make them again usable?
regards and thanks?

hi,
check this query below
create table test (id number(10));
create table succeeded.
insert into test values (10);
1 rows inserted
commit;
create index test_indx on test(id);
select index_name, status from user_indexes
where table_name = 'TEST';
INDEX_NAME STATUS
TEST_INDX VALID
alter table test move tablespace users;
select index_name, status from dba_indexes
where table_name = 'TEST';
INDEX_NAME STATUS
TEST_INDX UNUSABLE
rebuliding index
alter index test_indx rebuild
alter index test_indx succeeded.
then check
select index_name, status from user_indexes
where table_name = 'TEST';
INDEX_NAME STATUS
TEST_INDX VALID

Script to find out table and index candidates to keep in the buffer pool

I am looking for a script to find out tables and indexes to keep in the buffer pool.
Could you help me on this ?
thanks...
Markus

this is more of a open question. As you know ur data well. We do not know whats ur data. cachin tables in buffer pool is okay, but it might age out after not being used...instead you can use the KEEP POOL...to cache small tables/popular tables into the keep pool...as keep pool guarantees full caching .....
here are some links on keep pool cacheing
http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/B19306_01/server.102/b14211/memory.htm#sthref410
http://www.dba-oracle.com/oracle_tips_cache_small_fts.htm
http://www.dba-oracle.com/t_script_automate_keep_pool_tables_indexes.htm
http://www.dba-oracle.com/oracle_news/news_caching_keep_pool_large_objects_clob_blob.htm
Edited by: user630084 on Apr 8, 2009 5:48 AM

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/

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.

Table is not in the same position form 1 page to next

Hi,
Following my earlier posts regarding my website and the lack
of text. I thought if I created a new index page with text and and
enter site button this would go some way to sorting out the
problem. The problem now is that the indes page table is not in the
same plase as the tables on the other pages. Any assistance on
getting these lined up would be much appreciated.
The URL for my site is:
http://www.martingreshoff.co.uk
The code for my new index page is as follows:

What are these (on the linked page)?
<a href="#" onMouseOut="MM_swapImgRestore()"
onMouseOver="MM_swapImage('Image8','','Resourses/Images/Gallery
Free
Second.jpg',1)"></a><a href="#"
onMouseOut="MM_swapImgRestore()"
onMouseOver="MM_swapImage('Image9','','Resourses/Images/Gallery 3
Fitted
second.jpg',1)"></a><a href="#"
onMouseOut="MM_swapImgRestore()"
onMouseOver="MM_swapImage('Image10','','Resourses/Images/Gallery 4
Box
Second.jpg',1)"></a>
If you had a menu row at the top of the table on this page,
like you do on
the other pages, the table would be in the same place. Just
put an empty
row up there....
Murray --- ICQ 71997575
Adobe Community Expert
(If you *MUST* email me, don't LAUGH when you do so!)
==================
http://www.dreamweavermx-templates.com
- Template Triage!
http://www.projectseven.com/go
- DW FAQs, Tutorials & Resources
http://www.dwfaq.com - DW FAQs,
Tutorials & Resources
http://www.macromedia.com/support/search/
- Macromedia (MM) Technotes
==================
"greshoff" <[email protected]> wrote in
message
news:[email protected]...
> Hi,
>
> Following my earlier posts regarding my website and the
lack of text. I
> thought if I created a new index page with text and and
enter site button
> this
> would go some way to sorting out the problem. The
problem now is that the
> indes
> page table is not in the same plase as the tables on the
other pages. Any
> assistance on getting these lined up would be much
appreciated.
>
> The code for my new index page is as follows:
>
> <meta name="keywords" content="timber, furniture,
wood, quality, hand
> crafted,
> custom made, free standing, bespoke, fitted furniture,
man made boards,
> fine,
> furniture maker, cabinet maker, wooden, tables, chairs,
bookcases, boxes,
> decorative boxes, craftsman, greshoff, Greshoff,
commissions, wood
> veneer,
> Martin">
> <meta name="description" content="Martin Greshoff
furniture maker with
> examples of free standing, fitted furniture &
decorative boxes in solid
> timber
> & man made boards"/>
> <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0
Transitional//EN"
> "
http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
> <html xmlns="
http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
> <head>
> <link rel="shortcut icon" href="favicon.ico" >
> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=iso-8859-1" />
> <style type="text/css">
> 
> </style></head>
>
> <body>
> 
> 
> 
> <table width="733" height="475" border="0"
align="center"
> background="Resourses/Images/Home_Page.jpg">
> <tr>
> <td height="471" align="right" valign="top"> class="style2"> 
> class="style4">MARTIN
> GRESHOFF is a furniture maker who
produces 
> one off pieces of bespoke custom made furniture to 
> the highest standards of
>
craftsmanship.
> Inside you will find some
examples of some of
> the
> 
> commissions I have undertaken. 
> The following galleries are
included: 
> Free Standing
> Furniture with examples of
bookcases, 
> cabinets, tables, chairs, cupboards, cabinets and a
display case.
> 
> Fitted
Furniture with
> examples of a library, kitchens 
> and a dressing room.
> Decorative Boxes
with
> examples of Jewellery Boxes 
> with inlays & lift out trays and small trinket
boxes
> Press
with some of the
> published work relating to 
> Martin Greshoff Furniture.
> <img
> src="Resourses/Images/Enter_Site1.jpg" width="166"
height="39" border="0"
> usemap="#Map" />
> </td>
> </tr>
> </table>
>
> <map name="Map" id="Map">
> <area shape="rect" coords="1,-2,165,38"
href="Home.html" />
> </map>
> 
> <script type="text/javascript"
language="javascript">
> var sc_project=2215289;
> var sc_invisible=1;
> var sc_partition=20;
> var sc_security="dc3fe825";
> </script>
>
> <script type="text/javascript" language="javascript"
> src="
http://www.statcounter.com/counter/counter.js"></script><noscript><a
> href="
http://www.statcounter.com/"
target="_blank"><img
> src="
http://c21.statcounter.com/counter.php?sc_project=2215289&java=0&security=d
> c3fe825&invisible=1" alt="web site hit counter"
border="0"></a>
> </noscript>
> 
> <script
type="text/javascript"
> src="
http://www.ritecounter.com/c/47/46578.js"></script><noscript><a
> [links to
> '
http://www.ritecounter.com/c/47/46578.js"
> href="
http://www.ritecounter.com"><img
[links to
> '
http://www.ritecounter.com"
> src="
http://www.ritecounter.com/scripts/htmlc.php?id=46578
[links to
> www.ritecounter.com/scripts/htmlc.php?id=46578]"
alt="Simple Invisible
> Counter"
> border=0></a></noscript>
> </body>
> </html>
>

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

Issues when Insert and Analyze at the same time

Hi All,
We have a weekend job that used to take 12-15 hours usually and insert around 8 millions of records to a table from external table. Last weekend the same load took 60 hours and it move to Monday and there are some business impact.
While we investigate the same issue we identified that there is one more weekend analyze job for all the tables and indexes and took around almost same time and we noticed that the table we inserted the 8 million records alone it took around 15 hours. This table now has around 91 Core records.
We need to identify why this jobs taken long time as almost 4 times compare to the normal scenario.
I would like to know what exactly happen when Analyze and insert happened to the table at the same time. And What all issues can occur because this.
Best Regards,
Shijo

Ok,
It is unclear what version you are using as you forgot to post that.
Furthermore it is unclear what 'Analyze' is, as analyze statistics was already deprecated in 9i.
Secondly, most people is this forum speak English, and they are accustomed international units only.
Sybrand Bakker
Senior Oracle DBA

Table and index in the same tablespace

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for