Re: Defragmenting table

Florent,

Try

      select count( <column_name> ) from <table>;

where <column_name> is the (indexed) primary key.

Len

>Len,
>Yes it is a 'wider' table than the others, (it has 10 columns of 2000
>chars).
>But how can I get around this problem, i.e. how can I change the SGA
>once and for all or work out the size it should be.
>Thanks.
>
>In article <39ce4ece.14800031_at_125.0.0.1>,
> lfc_at_zoom.co.uk (Leonard F Clark) wrote:
>> Florent,
>>
>> Is this table significantly *wider* than the others (i.e. does it have
>> a lot of columns, or some very large columns.
>>
>> We have found that a count(*) pulls the dictionary cache for that
>> table (I think - it was a while ago and may have been some other part
>> of the SGA). So one possible explanation is that a component of the
>> SGA is sized too small.
>>
>> Len
>>
>> >Hi there,
>> >I hope that someone could help me with a little problem.
>> >I often have to do a query on a table, +/-30000 rows, but for some
>> >reason the system takes between 10 to 40 secs to return from the
 select
>> >count(*), statement, (other tables are 5 times the size and 3 times
>> >faster).
>> >There are 2 indexes and 2 primary keys. The size of the table would
>> >indicate that it should be very quick.
>> >For the purpose of the application I have to do a select count(*)
 often
>> >as the exact number of rows varies from time to time, does any one
 know
>> >a better way of doing it or a SQL statement that would defrag the
 table.
>> >Any help would be great, (and would make me look great at work).
>> >Thanks for all the help you can give.
>> >Florent.
>> >
>> >
>> >Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>> >Before you buy.
>>
>>
>
>
>Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>Before you buy.
  Received on Sun Oct 01 2000 - 10:02:12 CDT