Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid
HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US
 

Home -> Community -> Mailing Lists -> Oracle-L -> RE: providing 24*7 database ---

RE: providing 24*7 database ---

From: <Cherie_Machler_at_gelco.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2001 08:40:13 -0700
Message-ID: <F001.003B33BA.20011024083525@fatcity.com>

Tony,

If the partitioned indexes have a locality of global (not local), then they become invalid after activity on the underlying table partitions.

Does Narender say whether his indexes are global or local?

Cherie Machler

                                                                                       
                          
                    "Aponte, Tony"                                                     
                          
                    <AponteT_at_hsn.n       To:     Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L 
<ORACLE-L_at_fatcity.com>     
                    et>                  cc:                                           
                          
                    Sent by:             Subject:     RE: providing 24*7 database ---  
                          
                    root_at_fatcity.c                                                     
                          
                    om                                                                 
                          
                                                                                       
                          
                                                                                       
                          
                    10/24/01 10:25                                                     
                          
                    AM                                                                 
                          
                    Please respond                                                     
                          
                    to ORACLE-L                                                        
                          
                                                                                       
                          
                                                                                       
                          




I couldn't verify that the non-partitioned indexes become unusable after exchanging the partition for the normal table. In the sample I posted I snipped the output of the queries on USER_INDEXES and USER_PART_INDEXES, but my tests showed that they remain valid. I'm curious to see why your results are different. Can you post the spooled output of your test?

Thanks.
Tony Aponte

     -----Original Message-----
     From: Narender Akula [mailto:narender.akula_at_terralink.co.nz]
     Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 10:30 PM
     To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
     Subject: RE: providing 24*7 database ---

     Thanks all for the input.
     hi tony ,
     Quick question ... when you exchange partititons with non partitioned
     table data , all indexes on non partitioned tables become unusable
     status right.
     do have to rebuild them after every exchnage...

     naren

-----Original Message-----
From: Aponte, Tony [mailto:AponteT_at_hsn.net] Sent: Tuesday, 23 October 2001 05:06 To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L Subject: RE: providing 24*7 database --- We use a modified version of your duplicate schema idea. But we don't have the objects in different schemas. We use partitioned objects so that we can exchange the partitions with the production tables at a scheduled time. The voodoo is that we use a single range partition of MAXVALUE and all indexes are LOCAL PARTITIONED. The partitioning key doesn't really matter in this setup since we aren't using the features for its advantages, just to be able to swap data and index segments on the fly. I've attached a transcript showing the actual sequence but I'll give you a short explanation first: There are production tables/indexes that are used by the application, whether directly or via synonyms. There is a second set of tables with a _TEMP suffix that have duplicate structural definitions (constraints, column names and data types, etc.) The indexes also end with a _TEMP but are identical to the production ones. The only difference is that they are partitioned tables/indexes. All partitioned objects have a single range partition by a bogus column. The single partition is bounded by the MAXVALUE keyword, so all of the data is contained in one partition. Now you can manipulate the _TEMP tables at your convenience without interrupting the access tot he "published" objects. Once you have refreshed your _TEMP objects and are ready to publish the new data your would execute a series of ALTER TABLE <tablename>_TEMP EXCHANGE PARTITION TABLE <tablename>. That's it. No re-pointing of synonyms, revalidating of views/stored procs./etc. The application keeps chugging along. The next execution of SQL will use the published tables. HTH Tony Aponte ********************** pseudo-attachment ****************************** SQL> create table x(x1 number,x2 varchar2(50)); Table created. SQL> create index xi1 on x(x1); Index created. SQL> create table y(x1 number,x2 varchar2(50)) 2 partition by range (x1) (partition y values less than (maxvalue)); Table created. SQL> create index yi1 on y(x1) 2 local (partition yi1 ); Index created. SQL> insert into x values (1,'original data from regular table'); 1 row created. SQL> insert into y values (2,'original data from partitioned table'); 1 row created. SQL> commit; Commit complete. SQL> select * from x; X1 X2
---------- --------------------------------------------------
1 original data from regular table SQL> select * from y; X1 X2
---------- --------------------------------------------------
2 original data from partitioned table SQL> alter table y exchange partition y with table x; Table altered. SQL> select * from x; X1 X2
---------- --------------------------------------------------
2 original data from partitioned table SQL> select * from y; X1 X2
---------- --------------------------------------------------
1 original data from regular table SQL> select * from user_indexes; output snipped SQL> select * from user_part_indexes; output snipped SQL> alter table y exchange partition y with table x; Table altered. SQL> select * from x; X1 X2
---------- --------------------------------------------------
1 original data from regular table SQL> select * from y; X1 X2
---------- --------------------------------------------------
2 original data from partitioned table SQL> select * from user_indexes; output snipped SQL> select * from user_part_indexes; output snipped SQL> drop table x; Table dropped. SQL> drop table y; Table dropped. SQL> spool off
-----Original Message-----
From: Narender Akula [mailto:narender.akula_at_terralink.co.nz] Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2001 5:30 PM To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L Subject: providing 24*7 database --- hi gurus, Our shop ( GIS oracle spatials ) attempting to provide a production database (7x 24 hours) , currently we have to offline database for users while loading of data. we donot what users to access data while loading. We are thinking of provide 24* 7 services to customers with out going offline. What are the best possible solutions ? I had few but I donot know its right direction ................. Possible Solutions Replication - * not possible until Oracle 9i spatial (because of the restriction on replicating objects). * Even then expense of additional licensing/machinery may be too great Duplicate instances - have 2 instances and users switch from one to other after production load.-- how to implement ? Duplicate schema within current database. Have 3 schemas inside a single TIPSPROD instance. The schema with the current data remains in production until the second schema is loaded with the new data. This is can only work if we introduce a third schema that holds the views. At certain time, we redefine all the views in the DATAVIEWS schema. --- its kind of duplication --- certainly not my option Can some body direct me where to look or any ideas ? TIA > narender.akula > -- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com -- Author: Narender Akula INET: narender.akula_at_terralink.co.nz Fat City Network Services -- (858) 538-5051 FAX: (858) 538-5051 San Diego, California -- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists
--------------------------------------------------------------------
To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message to: ListGuru_at_fatcity.com (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).
-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
-- 
Author: 
  INET: Cherie_Machler_at_gelco.com

Fat City Network Services    -- (858) 538-5051  FAX: (858) 538-5051
San Diego, California        -- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists
--------------------------------------------------------------------
To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
to: ListGuru_at_fatcity.com (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
(or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from).  You may
also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).
Received on Wed Oct 24 2001 - 10:40:13 CDT

Original text of this message

HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US