Writing on a remote table

Hi, I'm using OWB version 9.0.2.56.0.
I created a mapping that writes data in a table on a remote database (Solaris version 8.1.7.3) using a db link.
When I try to generate the mapping (which is configured "set based") I get the following error:
'VLD-2769 Database link is not allowed for data target FF0030'.
I can't believe that OWB can't write on a remote db... so... what I'm doing wrong?
Thank you very much for any help,
Carla Delmonte
Bit Systems
Milan - Italy

Carla,
Uploading of data across database link is not supported.
The reasons for this are:
- Pushing data across database link will result in poor performance, especially across gateways.
- RETURNING INTO clause in INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE does not support remote objects. Since the generated PL/SQL code relies on the row count given in returned ROWID collection from the RETURNING INTO clause during INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE to perform bulk processing correctly, the code would not work.
There are several not so optimal solutions to this problem. For example, you could define a staging table in the target database and use a post loading procedure to do the remote loading in a separate step.
Regards:
Igor

Similar Messages

Unable to insert into remote table

I have created a dblink (public), and a synonym(synonym1) pointing to a table in the remote database.
When I try to create a form based on the synonym the form creation fails with many errors saying "Synonym Trnslation no longer supported". I have tested the synonym via a dynamic page an it is valid and working.
I then try to refer to the object directly by using owner.table@dblink. This works fine until I try and insert into the remote table. Then I get the error "An unexpected error occurred: ORA-22816: unsupported feature with RETURNING clause (WWV-16016) ". Has anyone solved this. I can only assume that portal can somehow insert data into a remote table via a form. What use is it if it cant???

I am not clear on that Synonym ... but the following note solved the problem:
Subject: How to create a form on a view (and avoid WWV-16016)
Doc ID: Note:155654.1 Type: PROBLEM
Last Revision Date: 19-MAR-2003 Status: PUBLISHED
Problem Description
Portal 3.0.9.X
If you create an updateable view on two tables, with the needed
associated "INSTEAD_OF" trigger to perform the insert or update.
A Form on this view created in Portal returns the following error on
insert or update:
An unexpected error occurred: ORA-22816: unsupported feature with
RETURNING clause (WWV-16016).
Let's take a sample:
CREATE OR REPLACE VIEW V_EMP_DEPT ( EMPNO,
ENAME, JOB, DEPTNO, DNAME,
LOC ) AS select
e.empno
,e.ename
,e.job
,d.deptno
,d.dname
,d.loc
from emp e, dept d
where e.deptno = d.deptno
grant select,insert,update,delete on v_emp_dept to public;
create or replace TRIGGER VEMPDEPT_INSTEAD_OF_TRG
INSTEAD OF UPDATE or INSERT
ON v_emp_dept
REFERENCING OLD AS OLD NEW AS NEW
declare
begin
if updating then
if :new.empno != :old.empno then
raise_application_error(20001,'EMPNO could not be modified');
end if;
if :new.loc != :old.loc then
raise_application_error(20001,'LOC could not be modified');
end if;
if :new.dname != :old.dname then
raise_application_error(20001,'dname could not be modified');
end if;
if :new.ename != :old.ename then
update emp set ename=:new.ename where empno = :old.empno;
end if;
if :new.job != :old.job then
update emp set job=:new.job where empno = :old.empno;
end if;
if :new.deptno != :old.deptno then
update emp set deptno=:new.deptno where empno = :old.empno;
end if;
end if;
if inserting then
-- specify only valid deptumbers
insert into emp(empno,ename,job,deptno) values
(:new.empno,:new.ename,:new.job,:new.deptno);
end if;
end;
- Create a "Forms Based on a Table or View" on this view : 'V_EMP_DEPT'
- In the step 4, choose 'order by dname' in place of 'rowid'
The rest is default
- Run the form
- Push on the button query
- change one of the field and push the update button
You will see the error
Error: An unexpected error occurred: ORA-22816: unsupported feature
with RETURNING clause (WWV-16016)
Explanation
You are running in Bug 1589656. The code generated by Portal is using
RETURN clause for the UPDATE or INSERT SQL call to get the ROWID.
This is not possible on a VIEW created on two (or more) tables.
Solution Description
A possible workaround is to replace the insert button code and update button
code with calls to procedures doing exactly what is done in the trigger.
Assumption is made that the empno column could not be updated.
This implies that the validation options updatable checkbox for the empno column
is unchecked.
In the above example, this gives:
-- procedure to insert data as done in the trigger
create or replace procedure V_EMP_DEPT_INSERT(
p_session in out PORTAL30.wwa_api_module_session
IS
"_block" varchar2(30) := 'DEFAULT';
rec SCOTT.V_EMP_DEPT%ROWTYPE;
begin
rec.EMPNO:=p_session.get_value_as_NUMBER(
p_block_name => "_block",
p_attribute_name => 'A_EMPNO',
p_index => 1
rec.ENAME:=p_session.get_value_as_VARCHAR2(
p_block_name => "_block",
p_attribute_name => 'A_ENAME',
p_index => 1
rec.JOB:=p_session.get_value_as_VARCHAR2(
p_block_name => "_block",
p_attribute_name => 'A_JOB',
p_index => 1
rec.DEPTNO:=p_session.get_value_as_NUMBER(
p_block_name => "_block",
p_attribute_name => 'A_DEPTNO',
p_index => 1
insert into scott.emp(empno,ename,job,deptno)
values (rec.empno,rec.ename,upper(rec.job),rec.deptno);
exception
when others then
rollback;
raise;
end;
-- procedure that update data as done in the trigger
create or replace procedure V_EMP_DEPT_UPDATE(
p_session in out PORTAL30.wwa_api_module_session
IS
"_block" varchar2(30) := 'DEFAULT';
old_rec SCOTT.V_EMP_DEPT%ROWTYPE;
new_rec SCOTT.V_EMP_DEPT%ROWTYPE;
begin
new_rec.EMPNO:=p_session.get_value_as_NUMBER(
p_block_name => "_block",
p_attribute_name => 'A_EMPNO',
p_index => 1
new_rec.ENAME:=p_session.get_value_as_VARCHAR2(
p_block_name => "_block",
p_attribute_name => 'A_ENAME',
p_index => 1
new_rec.JOB:=p_session.get_value_as_VARCHAR2(
p_block_name => "_block",
p_attribute_name => 'A_JOB',
p_index => 1
new_rec.DEPTNO:=p_session.get_value_as_NUMBER(
p_block_name => "_block",
p_attribute_name => 'A_DEPTNO',
p_index => 1
new_rec.LOC:=p_session.get_value_as_NUMBER(
p_block_name => "_block",
p_attribute_name => 'A_LOC',
p_index => 1
select empno, ename, job, deptno, loc
into old_rec.empno, old_rec.ename, old_rec.job,
old_rec.deptno, old_rec.loc from scott.V_EMP_DEPT
where empno = new_rec.empno;
if new_rec.empno != old_rec.empno then
raise_application_error(20001,'EMPNO could not be modified');
end if;
if new_rec.loc != old_rec.loc then
raise_application_error(20001,'LOC could not be modified');
end if;
if new_rec.dname != old_rec.dname then
raise_application_error(20001,'dname could not be modified');
end if;
if new_rec.ename != old_rec.ename then
update scott.emp set ename=new_rec.ename where empno =
old_rec.empno;
end if;
if new_rec.job != old_rec.job then
update scott.emp set job=new_rec.job where empno = old_rec.empno;
end if;
exception
when NO_DATA_FOUND then
raise_application_error(20001,'EMPNO could not be modified');
end;
After creating this two procedures you have to edit the form and replace the
Insert and Update button PLSQL event handling code.
For the insert button: Select Insert in the PL/SQL Button Event Handler window
and replace the original code with the following one::
--- Type your PL/SQL code here...
-- doInsert;--- This is the default handler
--- ...and here, thanks...
V_EMP_DEPT_INSERT( p_session => p_session);
For the update button: Select Update in the PL/SQL Button Event Handler window
and replace the original code with the following one:
--- Type your PL/SQL code here...
-- doUpdate;--- This is the default handler
--- ...and here, thanks...
V_EMP_DEPT_UPDATE( p_session => p_session );
Remarks
1) Don't forget to uncheck the updatable validation option for the empno column or
you may see some errors raised by the update procedure or update the wrong record.
2) If you don't want to write the "instead of trigger", you can simplify
the code above by:
- writing no instead of trigger at all
- write the logic to the underlying tables in PL/SQL trigger of Portal
( here V_EMP_DEPT_UPDATE, V_EMP_DEPT_INSERT)
- Manohar

JDBC Thin driver doesn't support writing data into remote database via database link

Dear Oracle Guru:
Please confirm: Oracle JDBC thin driver does not support writing data to remote database via database link.
The following errors occur when trying to write data into a remote database via database link through jdbc thin driver:
ORA-03106: fatal two-task communication protocol error
ORA-02063: preceding line from FDBE.PAPDSRAS1
ORA-02063: preceding 2 lines from PA
SQL statement is a prepared statement using a SQL like: insert into mytable@pa (col1,col2) values (?,?).
Thanks.
null

Thanks, Dan.
I still think it is a driver problem, because I can do similar things in a stored procedure or in PL/SQL Developer to copy records from a local database table to a remote database table via database link (insert into mytable@pa select * from mytable). The value for distributed_transactions of our database is 10.

9iR2 : FORALL UPDATE is not working with remote table

Hi,
I am trying to use BULK COLLECT & FORALL to get records from a remote table (using Dblink) and insert the copy of the data locally and update the remote table to mark the record being processed. FORALL is working well with local tables but with not remote table. Am I missing some thing here interms of permissions or it would n't work that way?
Thanks
Sara

Hello,
I have the exact same question. I understand I cannot use FORALL with a database link, but what is the best alternative?
The removte databases are on ships and the bandwidth is very narrow. I need to bulk collect about 8000 records a day; update the loacal database; and then update the remote (ship) database that I have taken these records.
I can use the database link in a classic cursor FOR loop, but with the narrow bandwidtch it takes hours.
Short of writing a file on the local server, ftp'ing it to the remote server any suggestions? Would Advanced Queuing be appropriate here?
Gary

Best practice for VPD and remote tables

Not specifically an HTMLDB question, but here goes...
HTMLDB 1.6 on 9.2.0.4 connecting over database link (fixed username/password) to 9.2.0.4
I've currently "wrapped" access to the remote tables in views, i.e. view "T" in the HTMLDB parsing schema LOCAL_USER is defined as "SELECT * FROM T@remote"
I'd like to put VPD controls on my backend tables, but I don't get how v('APP_USER') (or even APP_USER put into an application context) would be seen by the remote database.
Should I just put VPD policies on LOCAL_USER's views and call it a day?
Thanks for input!
-John

If you implemented the VPD in the remote database, what would your VPD be restricting? All queries would apply the policy based on the DB link fixed username resulting in all users of the HTML DB application having same policy restrictions.
The policy in the remote database does not has access to the value of v('APP_USER'). That value is only available in the database that has HTML DB. You would have to write APIs in the remote database in PL/SQL functions/procedures to pass in the V('APP_USER') value to the remote database. This is doable, but cumbersome.
If you want to have your policy modify your WHERE clause on the fly based on your HTML DB user account, then I would implement the VPD in the database which has your HTML DB repository. I am not sure which of the two scenarios below occur when doing a SELECT * FROM T.
1.) The query goes across the database link, gets all the data out of table T in the remote database, passes back to the HTML DB database, and applies the policy WHERE clause modification in the HTML DB database.
2.) The query applies the policy WHERE clause modification to the view, goes across the database link with the WHERE clause modified, and gets only the data allowed based on the policy from the remote database.
You should test this out to find out for performance purposes what query is actually performed on the remote database.
As always if anyone sees anything inaccurate in what I have written, please correct me.
Mike

Problem encountered when join two remote tables in a materialized view

I'm using oracle 9.2.0.6
1> I have two tables:
CREATE TABLE TEST
A VARCHAR2(100 BYTE),
C DATE
CREATE TABLE TEST1
A VARCHAR2(100 BYTE),
B TIMESTAMP
2>. I defined a prebuild table:
CREATE TABLE MV_TEST1
ID1 ROWID,
A VARCHAR2(100 BYTE),
ID2 ROWID,
B TIMESTAMP(6),
C DATE
3> I created mview logs:
CREATE MATERIALIZED VIEW LOG ON PSI_TEST.TEST
WITH ROWID
INCLUDING NEW VALUES;
CREATE MATERIALIZED VIEW LOG ON PSI_TEST.TEST1
WITH ROWID
INCLUDING NEW VALUES;
4> when I create mview:
CREATE MATERIALIZED VIEW PSI_TEST.MV_TEST1
ON PREBUILT TABLE WITH REDUCED PRECISION
REFRESH FAST ON DEMAND
WITH PRIMARY KEY
AS
select
test.rowid id1,
test.a,
test1.rowid id2,
test1.b,
cast(null as date) c
from test , test1
where test.a = test1.a(+);
It is created successfully.
5> problem:
when I use remote tables to do the same thing, say test and test1 are in another instance and are connected by a dbLink, I couldn't create the mview successfully:
CREATE MATERIALIZED VIEW PSI_TEST.MV_TEST1
ON PREBUILT TABLE WITH REDUCED PRECISION
REFRESH FAST ON DEMAND
WITH PRIMARY KEY
AS
select
a.rowid id1,
a.a,
b.rowid id2,
b.b,
cast(null as date) c
from test@dbl a, test1@dbl b
where a.a = b.a(+);
when run above statement, I got:
ORA-12015: cannot create a fast refresh materialized view from a complex query
Any ideas? Or joining two table through a dblink for a mview is not allowed at all?
Thanks in advance.

No one has a clue?
Message was edited by:
lzhwxy

20 Index Restriction on Remote Tables (i.e. using Database Links)

The Oracle Database Administrator's Guides for 10g and 11g document a performance restriction that "No more than 20 indexes are considered for a remote table." If I go back to the 8i documentation it says "In cost-based optimization, no more than 20 indexes per remote table are considered when generating query plans. The order of the indexes varies; if the 20-index limitation is exceeded, random variation in query plans may result."
Does anyone have more details on this performance restriction? In particular I am trying to answer these questions:
1) Are the 20 indexes which are considered by the CBO still random in 10g?
2) Can I influence which indexes are considered with index hints or will my hints only be considered if they are for one of the "random" 20 indexes which are being considered by the CBO?
3) Are there any other approaches or work-arounds to this restriction assuming you need to select from a large remote table with more than 20 indexes (and need to perform the selection using 1 of those indexes to get adequate performance) or do we need to abandon database links for this table?
Thanks in advance for your input.

So, here's my simple test.
SQL>
SQL> create table gurnish.indexes20plus ( n1 number, n2 number, n3 number, n4 number, n5 number, n6 number, n7 number,
2 n8 number, n9 number, n10 number, n11 number, n12 number, n13 number, n14 number, n15 number, n16 number,
3 n17 number, n18 number, n19 number, n20 number, n21 number, n22 number, n23 number, n24 number,
4 n25 number, n26 number, n28 number);
create index xin1 on indexes20plus (n1);
Table created.
SQL> SQL> create index xin2 on indexes20plus (n2);
create index xin3 on indexes20plus (n3);
Index created.
SQL> SQL>
Index created.
SQL> SQL> create index xin4 on indexes20plus (n4);
Index created.
SQL> SQL>
Index created.
SQL> SQL> create index xin5 on indexes20plus (n5);
create index xin6 on indexes20plus (n6);
Index created.
SQL> SQL>
Index created.
SQL> SQL> create index xin7 on indexes20plus (n7);
Index created.
SQL> SQL> create index xin8 on indexes20plus (n8);
Index created.
SQL> SQL> create index xin9 on indexes20plus (n9);
Index created.
SQL>
SQL> create index xin10 on indexes20plus (n10);
Index created.
SQL> SQL> create index xin11 on indexes20plus (n11);
create index xin12 on indexes20plus (n12);
create index xin13 on indexes20plus (n13);
Index created.
SQL> SQL>
Index created.
SQL> SQL>
Index created.
SQL> SQL> create index xin14 on indexes20plus (n14);
Index created.
SQL> SQL> create index xin15 on indexes20plus (n15);
Index created.
SQL>
SQL> create index xin16 on indexes20plus (n16);
Index created.
SQL>
SQL> create index xin17 on indexes20plus (n17);
Index created.
SQL> SQL> create index xin18 on indexes20plus (n18);
Index created.
SQL> SQL> create index xin19 on indexes20plus (n19);
Index created.
SQL> SQL> create index xin20 on indexes20plus (n20);
Index created.
SQL> SQL> create index xin21 on indexes20plus (n21);
Index created.
declare
i number;
begin
for i in 1..100
loop
dbms_random.seed(i+100);
insert into indexes20plus values (dbms_random.value(1,5),dbms_random.value(1,21),dbms_random.RANDOM, dbms_random.RANDOM,dbms_random.value(1,20),
dbms_random.value(1,4),dbms_random.value(1,6), dbms_random.value(1,7),dbms_random.value(1,9),dbms_random.value(1,10),
dbms_random.value(1,11),dbms_random.value(1,12),dbms_random.value(1,13),dbms_random.value(1,14),dbms_random.value(1,1),
dbms_random.value(1,1),dbms_random.value(1,19),dbms_random.value(1,122),dbms_random.value(1,20),dbms_random.value(1,20)
,dbms_random.value(4,20),dbms_random.value(1,20),dbms_random.value(1,20),dbms_random.value(1,20),dbms_random.value(1,20)
,dbms_random.value(4,20),dbms_random.value(4,20));
end loop;
commit;
end;
SQL> set autotrace traceonly
SQL> l
1* select * from gurnish.indexes20plus@lvoprds where n1 = 4
SQL> /
no rows selected
Execution Plan
Plan hash value: 441368878
| Id | Operation | Name | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU
)| Time | Inst |
| 0 | SELECT STATEMENT REMOTE | | 1 | 351 | 1 (0
)| 00:00:01 | |
| 1 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID| INDEXES20PLUS | 1 | 351 | 1 (0
)| 00:00:01 | LVPRD |
|* 2 | INDEX RANGE SCAN | XIN1 | 1 | | 1 (0
)| 00:00:01 | LVPRD |
Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
2 - access("A1"."N1"=4)
Note
- fully remote statement
- dynamic sampling used for this statement
Statistics
0 recursive calls
0 db block gets
0 consistent gets
0 physical reads
0 redo size
1897 bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
481 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
1 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
0 sorts (memory)
0 sorts (disk)
0 rows processed
SQL> select * from gurnish.indexes20plus@lvoprds where n21 = 4;
no rows selected
Execution Plan
Plan hash value: 2929530649
| Id | Operation | Name | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU
)| Time | Inst |
| 0 | SELECT STATEMENT REMOTE | | 1 | 351 | 1 (0
)| 00:00:01 | |
| 1 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID| INDEXES20PLUS | 1 | 351 | 1 (0
)| 00:00:01 | LVPRD |
|* 2 | INDEX RANGE SCAN | XIN21 | 1 | | 1 (0
)| 00:00:01 | LVPRD |
Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
2 - access("A1"."N21"=4)
Note
- fully remote statement
- dynamic sampling used for this statement
Statistics
1 recursive calls
0 db block gets
0 consistent gets
0 physical reads
0 redo size
1897 bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
481 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
1 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
0 sorts (memory)
0 sorts (disk)
0 rows processed
SQL>

Error remote table does not contain a primary key

I make replication between oracle and Microsoft sql using getway for sql but when I insert to table in oracle I get this error in apply process
information :
ASD.SUBHI.COM is database link from oracle to microsoft sql
"DBO"."REGIONS" name of the table
CREATE TABLE regions (a INTEGER primary key) command to create table
error
ORA-26711: remote table does not contain a primary key constraint ORA-26712: remote object is "DBO"."REGIONS"@"ASD.SUBHI.COM"
Note: I go to sql server and verify that primary key is creates
is this the best place to like this question ?
if you need more details please tell me I need the answer

I make replication between oracle and Microsoft sql using getway for sql but when I insert to table in oracle I get this error in apply process
information :
ASD.SUBHI.COM is database link from oracle to microsoft sql
"DBO"."REGIONS" name of the table
CREATE TABLE regions (a INTEGER primary key) command to create table
error
ORA-26711: remote table does not contain a primary key constraint ORA-26712: remote object is "DBO"."REGIONS"@"ASD.SUBHI.COM"
Note: I go to sql server and verify that primary key is creates
is this the best place to like this question ?
if you need more details please tell me I need the answer

Instead-of Trigger of View on a Remote Table Fails!!!

Hi all,
I'm trying to create an INSTEAD OF (UPDATE or INSERT) trigger on a view V1 in DATABASE DB1 (Linux 7.3 or 7.2, ORACLE 9.2.0.1.0 - Production).The view V1 is created on a remote table through a DBLINK.But I always get such error when I update the view V1 using statements such as "update v1 set oid=oid+1000" :
ORA-03113 end-of-file on communication channel
But I can execute those statements successfully in Oracle of version 9.0.1.0.0 .
What I want to say is that if some special configs is needed to support instead-of trigger of a view on a remote table ?

Hi all,
I'm trying to create an INSTEAD OF (UPDATE or INSERT) trigger on a view V1 in DATABASE DB1 (Linux 7.3 or 7.2, ORACLE 9.2.0.1.0 - Production).The view V1 is created on a remote table through a DBLINK.But I always get such error when I update the view V1 using statements such as "update v1 set oid=oid+1000" :
ORA-03113 end-of-file on communication channel
But I can execute those statements successfully in Oracle of version 9.0.1.0.0 .
What I want to say is that if some special configs is needed to support instead-of trigger of a view on a remote table ?

Query remote table not working in PL/SQL

I have a problem that is killing me to figure out. Basically we trying to query a remote table through PL/SQL and it comes back with invalid column name for the table. But the table exists in the remote database and has the column. The query works fine from the same database outside of PL/SQL, just not in PL/SQL. I'll setup a test case below.
We have local database called DB1 and remote database called DB2. The table we are querying is called EMP.
First we create database link:
create database link DB2.WORLD connect to...
Test the link:
select ENAME from [email protected];
ENAME
SHAWN
Works fine.
Now we put this query inside a PL/SQL block:
declare
l_ename varchar2(20);
begin
select ename into l_ename from [email protected];
end;
This fails with the following error:
select ename
ERROR at line 274:
ORA-06550: line 274, column 7:
PL/SQL: ORA-00904: invalid column name
ORA-06550: line 271, column 3:
PL/SQL: SQL Statement ignored
ORA-06550: line 279, column 9:
PL/SQL: ORA-00904: invalid column name
ORA-06550: line 277, column 3:
PL/SQL: SQL Statement ignored
Now, I've tried changing how we select from the remote table, I've put the select statement in a cursor, tried creating a synonym which points to the remote table and selecting using the synonym in PL/SQL, it always returns the same error. But always works outside of PL/SQL.
Now the user we are connecting to the remote database as, has select on the EMP table, through a role, along with 30 other tables, all the other tables are able to be selected through the database link, in PL/SQL, it's just this one table.
Additionally I can go to another database, and create the same database link, and the query in PL/SQL works fine to the remote table. It's just this one table, from this one database, that doesn't work just in PL/SQL. Any ideas would be appreciated, I've exhausted everything.
Also, creating a copy of the table using "create table as select * from..." we can select from the copy of the table using PL/SQL through the database link. The problem is this is a central warehouse table, and is used my multiple applications and updated constantly, so dropping a recreating this table is a last resort.
Yes, this process did work, for over a year, then suddenly it stopped. Of course, no one made any changes to either database, that's always the case. I know the code didn't change though, it was still timestamped from a year ago.
Thanks in advance.

Could this be a variant on an old favourite, viz privileges being granted through roles. We cannot use objects in PL/SQL if our privileges are assigned through a role.
Maybe what has changed is that instead of being granted privileges on EMP@DB2 directly the privileges have been re-organised so that your user has them granted through a role.
Cheers, APC

How to load XML data to remote table?

I have a table in our DEV instance with XMLTYPE data in it:
TB_PAGE_DATA
( PAGEID INTEGER,
PAGENAME VARCHAR2(250) NOT NULL,
PAGECONTENT SYS.XMLTYPE,
CREATEDATE DATE NOT NULL,
UPDATEDATE DATE
)The same table exists in PROD, but it is currently empty. I want to load it with all the records from DEV, but apparently I can't do this via DB Link since I get an error:
INSERT INTO tb_page_data@prod_link
(select *
from tb_page_data)
ORA-22804: remote operations not permitted on object tables or user-defined type columns

Performing DML utilizing a remote table with XMLTYPE seems to be the issue, so I"m not sure if this would work also. In any case, the PROD instance does not have a link going back to the DEV instance. I cannot create this link.

Problem with writing a procedure with table name as an input parameter

Hi all,
I am writing a procedure with table name as an input parameter:
below is the code
create or replace procedure prc(in_tbl in varchar2)
as
begin
execute immediate ' truncate table tlb ';
insert into tbl
select a,b,c from in_tbl;
end;

user579585 wrote:
Hi all,
I am writing a procedure with table name as an input parameter:
below is the code
create or replace procedure prc(in_tbl in varchar2)
as
begin
execute immediate ' truncate table tlb ';
insert into tbl
select a,b,c from in_tbl;
end;You'll also need to use dynamic sql for the insert:
execute immediate 'begin insert into tbl select a,b,c from '||in_tbl||'; end';

Writing to a temp table in a stored procedure with dynamic sql

Hi
I am writing into a temp table with dynamic sql:
select coloum_name into #temp_table from
+
@DestinationDBName+'.information_schema.tables
and then I am trying to use #temp_table in the procedure:
select coloum_name into #anotherTable from #temp_table
but I am getting an error that #temp_table is not recognized.
Can a temp table not be used in dynamic sql ?
How can I overcome this problem ?

Temp Table Can used easily in Dynamic Query in SQL Server and here is small Exmaple you can check it and do like it
CREATE PROC test
AS
BEGIN
CREATE TABLE #T1
(ID int , NAME Nvarchar(50))
CREATE TABLE #T2
(ID int , NAME Nvarchar(50))
DECLARE @SQL NVARCHAR(MAX)='Insert into #T1
SELECT database_id , Name FROM Sys.Databases
Insert into #T2 Select ID , Name from #T1 '
EXEC SP_ExecuteSQL @SQL
SELECT * FROM #T2
DROP TABLE #T1
DROP TABLE #T2
END
Exec Test
If you found My reply is helpful for you please vote me
thanks
Mustafa EL-Masry
Principle Database Administrator & DB Analyst
SQL Server MCTS-MCITP
M| +966 54 399 0968
MostafaElmasry.Wordpress.Com

Joining to remote table

- I have two databases A and B
- A has a db link to B
I want to execute a select query in A which joins to a table in B using db link.
select * from a_table where id in ( select id from b_table@B )
Now the problem is, even though the local 'a_table' is very small, the remote table in B is really huge and hence the query is very slow.
It seems like the join operation brings the whole remote data to A for performing the join.
My question is, is it possible to do the other way? That is is, take the small 'a_table' to the remote database, perform the join there and then bring back the data.
Any other hints/thoughts to solve this also is greatly appreciated.

I am really sorry. The sample query was the other way round. A mistake in my description.
I want to select data from B which joins to a table in A using db link.
select * from b_table@B where id in ( select id from a_table )
Arun, Thanks for the reply. But I am not sure if it will solve problem of transporting data from one db to another for performing the join.

How to increase Array size while copying from remote table

Hi everyone,
I am using remote copy to copy 900,000(9 millions) records to local data base ,but it is taking long time obviuosly. The message i see while copying is
Array fetch/bind size is 15 (array size is 15)
can Array size be changed to make copy faster or
any otherway to copy 9 million reocrds fastly?
regards,
Karna

I guess that you are using the 'copy' command in sql*plus.
1. You could export the remote table and import the data into your local table. That perhaps would be efficient.
2. You could increase the array size for example,
SQL> show arraysize
arraysize 15
SQL> set arraysize 5000
SQL> show arraysize
arraysize 5000
SQL> What is the value for sql*plus option 'copycommit'?
SQL> show copycommit
copycommit 0
SQL>

Writing on a remote table

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for