Return-Path: Delivered-To: 2-oracle-l@orafaq.com Received: (qmail 29414 invoked from network); 18 Jul 2007 03:32:29 -0500 Received: from freelists-180.iquest.net (HELO turing.freelists.org) (206.53.239.180) by 69.64.49.119 with SMTP; 18 Jul 2007 03:32:28 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id 3BFBE713AC0; Wed, 18 Jul 2007 04:30:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from turing.freelists.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (turing.freelists.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 24306-03; Wed, 18 Jul 2007 04:30:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from turing (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id 29B0971394C; Wed, 18 Jul 2007 04:30:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list oracle-l); Wed, 18 Jul 2007 03:49:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id 05E3E71455A for ; Wed, 18 Jul 2007 03:49:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from turing.freelists.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (turing.freelists.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 10456-08 for ; Wed, 18 Jul 2007 03:49:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailgw2a.lmco.com (mailgw2a.lmco.com [192.91.147.7]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id DB3A4714088 for ; Wed, 18 Jul 2007 03:49:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from emss03g01.ems.lmco.com (relay3.ems.lmco.com [141.240.4.144])by mailgw2a.lmco.com (LM-6) with ESMTP id l6I7ovTj025522;Wed, 18 Jul 2007 03:50:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from CONVERSION2-DAEMON.lmco.com by lmco.com (PMDF V6.3-x3 #31239) id <0JLD0000174X0B@lmco.com>; Wed, 18 Jul 2007 03:50:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from EMSS04I00.us.lmco.com ([166.17.13.135]) by lmco.com (PMDF V6.3-x3 #31239) with ESMTP id <0JLD00CVC74VY1@lmco.com>; Wed, 18 Jul 2007 03:50:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from EMSS04I01.us.lmco.com ([166.17.13.118]) by EMSS04I00.us.lmco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Wed, 18 Jul 2007 03:50:55 -0400 Received: from EMIS00M01.intl.lmco.com ([192.91.151.79]) by EMSS04I01.us.lmco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Wed, 18 Jul 2007 03:50:55 -0400 Received: from EMSS51M08.uk.lmco.com ([172.18.69.35]) by EMIS00M01.intl.lmco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Wed, 18 Jul 2007 03:50:25 -0400 Received: from EMSS51M09.uk.lmco.com ([172.18.69.42]) by EMSS51M08.uk.lmco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Wed, 18 Jul 2007 08:50:23 +0100 Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 08:50:23 +0100 From: "Hallas, John (EXP N-ARM)" Subject: RE: tunning an index build In-reply-to: To: genegurevich@discover.com, oracle-l@freelists.org Message-id: <4C623E38629BDA469E90D1FF271309E9106FF3F1@emss51m09.uk.lmco.com> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Thread-Topic: tunning an index build Content-class: urn:content-classes:message X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: References: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Jul 2007 07:50:23.0726 (UTC) FILETIME=[4C2150E0:01C7C910] X-archive-position: 50980 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org Errors-to: oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org X-original-sender: john.hallas@lmco.com Precedence: normal Reply-to: john.hallas@lmco.com List-help: List-unsubscribe: List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0 List-Id: oracle-l X-List-ID: oracle-l List-subscribe: List-owner: List-post: List-archive: X-list: oracle-l X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at localhost.localdomain Is the table data sorted in any way. Can it be sorted? Are you building these indexes (I should write indices I know but it never seems right) regularly or just as a one off. If regularly then the rebuild option should be much faster John -----Original Message----- From: oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org [mailto:oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org] On Behalf Of genegurevich@discover.com Hi all: I think I have posted on this issue before, but I can't find my old Emails so - sorry for the repeated question. Here is the situation. I am running oracle 9208 and have a 40G table with a lot of indices - mostly bitmap Their sizes are under 1G. These indices take about 20 to 30 minutes to build. That seems to be too long. -- http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l