Re: sqlldr leaves records on the plate...

Have you tried tweeking bindsize and readsize on the sqlldr parameterse?

Deb

"Daniel A. Morgan" wrote:

> "J. Drummey" wrote:
>
> > For a migration project we're loading about 20 million records from flat files.
> > The records are 436 bytes each.
> >
> > We've broken up the data into seven files of slightly less than 2gb each and
> > run sqlldr(s) concurrently with direct=true and parallel=true.
> >
> > All records from the first file load without a problem. Each of the next 5
> > files loads perfectly except the last 18 records. At the end of operation,
> > we are 90 records short ( 18 x 5 ). The last file loads without a problem.
> > (It's much smaller ).
> >
> > Sqlldr gives an error on the first of the 18 records, then
> > ignores the rest of the file. If we take the same records from the end
> > of each file and start another sqlldr, the records load up fine, so it
> > doesn't seem data-related.
> >
> > I assume we're running into some built in size limitation. For some reason it
> > doesn't bother the first file ( which is actually the largest. )
> >
> > Anyone have a clue?
>
> I'm not aware of any limitation that would do what you are experiencing. My
> suspicion would be that there is something wrong with that 18th from the last
> record, perhaps a hidden character, causing it to abort.
>
> Try taking one of your files and editing out the 19th, 18th, and 17th records from
> the last and see what happens. My money is on the problem disappearing.
>
> Equally. I suspect that if you try to load those three records by themselves it
> will fail.
>
> Daniel A. Morgan
Received on Wed Jun 20 2001 - 15:42:44 CDT