Fyi, Oracle updated note 182699.1 last Friday. The inaccurate statements
about index fragmentation have been removed.
Cary Millsap
Hotsos Enterprises, Ltd.
http://www.hotsos.com
Upcoming events:
- Performance Diagnosis 101: 10/28 Phoenix, 11/19 Sydney
- SQL Optimization 101: 12/8-12 Dallas
-
Thanks for the info Cary.
Jared
On Mon, 2003-10-20 at 09:29, Cary Millsap wrote:
Fyi, Oracle updated note 182699.1 last Friday. The inaccurate statements
about index fragmentation have been removed.
Cary Millsap
Hotsos Enterprises, Ltd.
http://www.hotsos.com
Upcoming events:
-
Hi Hemant,
One word perfectly describes the Metalink article you highlighted:
Crap ;)
A nice example of how Oracle Corp is the greatest myth generator of them
all !! It's all rather sad and embarressing isn't.
Thanks for the headsup. Anyone in a position to get the note removed ?
Cheers
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
10/17/2003 04:29 AM
Please respond to ORACLE-L
To:Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject:Re: re Rebuilding Indexes in Oracle Apps -- was RE: RE: Separate
Hi Hemant,
One word perfectly describes
On Wed, 2003-10-15 at 18:04, M Rafiq
wrote: Jared,Those tables are transit
type of tables and depending on your volume of data, there are lot
of deletes and inserts all the time resuling index
fragmentation(holes due to deletes) and space usage.
The rebuilding not only release
All of that is fair enough but the number of rows and the values you've
chosen fit the point you wished to prove. The value 5 conveniently fits
the range for an existing leaf block with empty space.
The facts as I understand them are this :
Index space freed by deleted entries can be reused (
Correction. Paragraph 4 should begin, I agree though that index rebuilds
are often unnecessary.
Mike
-Original Message-
Sent: 16 October 2003 15:20
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
All of that is fair enough but the number of rows and the values you've
chosen fit the point you wished to prove.
: re Rebuilding Indexes in Oracle Apps -- was
RE:
RE: Separate
John
What about gl_interface table indexes? I think indexes on all *interface(
tables must be rebuild on a regular interval...I was building indexes on
gl_interfaces and fnd_request* tables on monthly basis.
Regards
Rafiq
]
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
10/16/2003 10:34 AM
Please respond to ORACLE-L
To:Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject:RE: re Rebuilding Indexes in Oracle Apps -- was RE: RE: Separate
Jared,
Unfortunately at this stage I cannot quantify
:
Subject:RE: re Rebuilding Indexes in Oracle Apps -- was RE:
RE: Separate
Jared,
Unfortunately at this stage I cannot quantify in numbers as I have left
that
job 5 months back. But dealing with Oracle Financials 10.7 with version
7.3.4, I observed it practically that this table
]
cc:
Subject:RE: re Rebuilding Indexes in Oracle Apps -- was RE: RE: Separate
John
What about gl_interface table indexes? I think indexes on all *interface(
tables must be rebuild on a regular interval...I was building indexes on
gl_interfaces and fnd_request* tables on monthly basis
Not
again :)
At
least we have to justify our pay :)
Waleed
Any views or opinions presented in this email are solely
those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the
company
-Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Wednesday,
by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
10/14/2003 03:49 PM
Please respond to ORACLE-L
To:Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject:RE: re Rebuilding Indexes in Oracle Apps -- was RE:
RE: Separate
John
What about gl_interface
PROTECTED]
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
10/14/2003 03:49 PM
Please respond to ORACLE-L
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject:RE: re Rebuilding Indexes in Oracle Apps -- was RE:
RE: Separate
John
What about gl_interface table
]
cc:
Subject:RE: re Rebuilding Indexes in Oracle Apps -- was RE:
RE: Separate
John
What about gl_interface table indexes? I think indexes on all *interface(
tables must be rebuild on a regular interval...I was building indexes on
gl_interfaces and fnd_request* tables
it?
Are they quantifiable?
Jared
M Rafiq [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
10/14/2003 03:49 PM
Please respond to ORACLE-L
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject:RE: re Rebuilding Indexes in Oracle Apps -- was RE
Hemant,
This applies on 11i only. I would rebuild all indexes supporting the
WF_ITEM_ACTIVITY_STATUSES and WF_ATTRIBUTE_VALUES tables. I have been
working on some AOL table(space) problems in the background and noticed that
in 11i by default, we are not be purging _all_ the WF data that we should
John
What about gl_interface table indexes? I think indexes on all *interface(
tables must be rebuild on a regular interval...I was building indexes on
gl_interfaces and fnd_request* tables on monthly basis.
Regards
Rafiq
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Rafiq,
John
What about gl_interface table indexes? I think indexes on all
*interface(
tables must be rebuild on a regular interval...I was building
indexes on
gl_interfaces and fnd_request* tables on monthly basis.
Indeed the interface tables suffer as well. I would suggest a TRUNCate of
Hi, I do rebuild index for table AP_INVOICES_ALL
but it seems that no effect on extents.
select owner, segment_name, tablespace_name, count(*), sum(bytes)
2 from sys.dba_extents
3 where segment_name like 'AP_INVOICES_N3' and tablespace_name='APX'
4 group by owner, segment_name,
20 matches
Mail list logo
