Re: Was: Rebuilding Indexes, Now: KEEP INDEX

Yes, but at least the index definition will be preserved so that you could do a simple "ALTER INDEX ... REBUILD" rather than finding and firing off a script. Particularly useful if you have a lots of partitioned indexes.

Arup
----- Original Message -----
To: "Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L" <ORACLE-L_at_fatcity.com> Sent: Monday, December 30, 2002 9:19 AM

> but if you direct load dups into a table with a unique
> cons/index, won't the index be left as 'UNUSABLE' thus
> necessitating an index rebuild anyway. If the index
> was non-unique, then this is not a problem, but in
> this case, you don't need KEEP INDEX anyway.
>
> Happy New Year
>
> Cheers
> Connor
>
> --- Rachel Carmichael <wisernet100_at_yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > unique constraint, unique index:
> > > - "keep index" redundant because effectively
> > retains
> > > the constraint anyway (because you still can't
> > insert
> > > dups)
> > >
> >
> >
> > you can insert dups via sqlloader using direct=true
> >
> > so in my case, this would indeed be helpful and
> > without the "keep
> > index" I lose the index when I do an alter table
> > drop constraint
> >
> > Keep index sounds like it will help me in this
> > scenario:
> >
> > primary key constraint with unique index
> > insert dups via sqlloader & direct=true
> > drop constraint with keep index
> > recreate constraint with exceptions into exceptions
> > table
> > delete dups
> > re-enable constraint
> >
> > this doesn't happen often, and we are working to fix
> > the app so it
> > doesn't put the dups into the input file for the
> > sqlload. However,
> > until it gets fixed, I need to do the above so that
> > we actually have
> > usable indexes on the partitioned fact tables
> >
> > --- Connor McDonald <hamcdc_at_yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> > > I'm a little doubtful about the value of 'keep
> > index'.
> > >
> > > Consider the scenarios:
> > >
> > > unique constraint, non-unique index:
> > > - "keep index" redundant because its kept anyway
> > >
> > > unique constraint, unique index:
> > > - "keep index" redundant because effectively
> > retains
> > > the constraint anyway (because you still can't
> > insert
> > > dups)
> > >
> > >
> > > So far, the only use for KEEP INDEX I've found is
> > the
> > > scenario where you:
> > >
> > > - decided that column(s) X was the primary key
> > > - created a unique index on it
> > > - created a primary key constraint on it
> > > - loaded the data
> > > - decided actually X was NOT the primary key, just
> > a
> > > unique value
> > > - decided that X could allow nulls as well
> > > - dropped the primary kept, kept the index and
> > then
> > > added a unique constraint...
> > >
> > > I would contend that this is a rare occurrence ?
> > >
> > > Cheers
> > > Connor
> > >
> > >
> > > --- Rachel Carmichael <wisernet100_at_yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > sigh. I need to find time to read ALL the docs.
> > > > Yeah, that'll happen.
> > > > If I can find a parallel universe where time
> > runs at
> > > > a different rate.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks, I'll test this out as well.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- Arup Nanda <arupnanda_at_hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > In 9.2, you can keep the index by using the
> > KEEP
> > > > INDEX key words.
> > > > >
> > > > > ALTER TABLE XXX DROP CONSTRAINT PK_XXX KEEP
> > INDEX
> > > > >
> > > > > This will keep the index but drop the
> > constraint.
> > > > Talk about having
> > > > > your
> > > > > cake and eating it too...;)
> > > > >
> > > > > HTH
> > > > >
> > > > > Arup
> > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > To: "Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L"
> > > > <ORACLE-L_at_fatcity.com>
> > > > > Sent: Friday, December 27, 2002 4:39 PM
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > it'll have to wait until Monday, I'm not at
> > work
> > > > until then. I'll
> > > > > try
> > > > > > it with a non-unique then
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hey, if it works, it saves me tons of time,
> > I
> > > > learn something new
> > > > > and I
> > > > > > had fun developing the single SQL statement
> > to
> > > > rebuild the
> > > > > constraint
> > > > > > and index. Win-win
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Rachel
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- Denny Koovakattu <groups_at_koovakattu.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I don't have access to 9.2.0.1 right
> > now.
> > > > But can you try
> > > > > creating
> > > > > > > a non-
> > > > > > > unique index instead of the unique index.
> > If
> > > > you create a unique
> > > > > > > index, it gets
> > > > > > > dropped. That's the behavior on 8.1.x
> > also.
> > > > But if it's a
> > > > > non-unique
> > > > > > > index, it
> > > > > > > shouldn't get dropped.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > > Denny
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Quoting Rachel Carmichael
> > > > <wisernet100_at_yahoo.com>:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 9.2.0.1 Solaris, and yes, it does drop
> > it
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I created a unique index in the primary
> > key
> > > > columns
> > > > > > > > I created the primary key constraint
> > without
> > > > specifying an
> > > > > index
> > > > > > > > I checked that the index existed, it did
> > > > > > > > I dropped the primary key constraint
> > > > > > > > I checked that the index existed, it
> > didn't
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > try it.... I tried various combinations
> > > > before posting this
> > > > > note
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --- Denny Koovakattu
> > <groups_at_koovakattu.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > If you build a separate index to
> > enforce
> > > > the primary key,
> > > > > > > Oracle
> > > > > > > > > shouldn't
> > > > > > > > > drop it when you disable or drop the
> > > > primary key.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > > > > Denny
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Quoting Rachel Carmichael
> > > > <wisernet100_at_yahoo.com>:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Here's a reason:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > have you ever tried to find the
> > three
> > > > duplicate rows in a
> > > > > 12
> > > > > > > > > million
> > > > > > > > > > row table without using the primary
> > key
> > > > constraint? I've
> > > > > had to
> > > > > > > > > > disable
> > > > > > > > > > or drop the constraint in order to
> > use
> > > > the exceptions
> > > > > table.
> > > > > > > Once
> > > > > > > > I
> > > > > > > > > do
> > > > > > > > > > that, even if I've built a separate
> > > > index that enforces the
> > > > > > > > primary
> > > > > > > > > > key
> > > > > > > > > > constraint, Oracle drops the index.
> > So I
> > > > HAVE to rebuild
> > > > > it. If
> > > > > > > I
> > > > > > > > > > allow
> > > > > > > > > > the index to be rebuilt when I
> > re-enable
> > > > the primary key
> > > > > > > > > constraint,
> > > > > > > > > > it
> > > > > > > > > > builds it in the default tablespace
> > of
> > > > the table owner, not
> > > > > > > where
> > > > > > > > I
> > > > > > > > > > want it.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > if anyone has a better way to fix
> > this
> > > > problem, I'm more
> > > > > than
> > > > > > > > happy
> > > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > hear it! It's a data warehouse and
> > the
> > > > third party app has
> > > > > a
> > > > > > > bug
> > > > > > > > we
> > > > > > > > > > can't find and on occasion sqlloads
> > (via
> > > > direct path)
> > > > > duplicate
> > > > > > > > > rows
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Rachel
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > --- Jared Still <jkstill_at_cybcon.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Though I have published a script
> > for
> > > > determining indexes
> > > > > that
> > > > > > > > > > > need to be rebuilt, and then
> > > > rebuilding them, I have to
> > > > > say
> > > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > > > > this is almost never necessary.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Why are you rebuilding indexes?
> > About
> > > > the only reason
> > > > > for
> > > > > > > ever
> > >
> > === message truncated ===
> >
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up
> > now.
> > http://mailplus.yahoo.com
> > --
> > Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ:
> > http://www.orafaq.net
> > --
> > Author: Rachel Carmichael
> > INET: wisernet100_at_yahoo.com
> >
> > Fat City Network Services -- 858-538-5051
> > http://www.fatcity.com
> > San Diego, California -- Mailing list and web
> > hosting services
> >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 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).
> >
>
> =====
> Connor McDonald
> http://www.oracledba.co.uk
> http://www.oaktable.net
>
> "GIVE a man a fish and he will eat for a day. But TEACH him how to fish,
and...he will sit in a boat and drink beer all day"
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Everything you'll ever need on one web page
> from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
> http://uk.my.yahoo.com
> --
> Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
> --
> Author: =?iso-8859-1?q?Connor=20McDonald?=
> INET: hamcdc_at_yahoo.co.uk
>
> Fat City Network Services -- 858-538-5051 http://www.fatcity.com
> San Diego, California -- Mailing list and web hosting services
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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.net
-- 
Author: Arup Nanda
  INET: arupnanda_at_hotmail.com

Fat City Network Services    -- 858-538-5051 http://www.fatcity.com
San Diego, California        -- Mailing list and web hosting services
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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).