Re: How to deal with objects of type UNDEFINED

From: Paul Brewer <paul_at_paul.brewers.org.uk>
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2002 19:53:50 +0100
Message-ID: <3d307b25_1@mk-nntp-1.news.uk.worldonline.com>

"Jonathan Lewis" <jonathan_at_jlcomp.demon.co.uk> wrote in message news:1026551292.17947.1.nnrp-12.9e984b29_at_news.demon.co.uk...
>

<snip>

> If you create a view that depends on a public synonym,
> your schema will suddenly contain an object of type
> UNDEFINED matching the name of the public synonym
> so that Oracle can do negative dependency checking.
>
> If you drop objects (possibly not all types), then the
> obj$ row is maintained with a type of UNDEFINED
> so that Oracle can re-use the same obj# if you
> create a new object before the next time the
> database is restarted.
>
> Possibly others I haven't noticed yet.
>
> --
> Jonathan Lewis
> http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk
>
> Next Seminars
> UK July / Sept
> Australia August
> Malaysia September
> USA (MI) November
>
> http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/seminar.html

That's quite clever stuff. Well done, Oracle. Just goes to show simple souls like me that there's often more to it than just a minor bug in a view, which until now I just assumed had overlooked a decode value. "Oh, yeah, when I check DBA_OBJECTS where status <> VALID I get type UNDEFINED and status INVALID, but I don't worry; it's just a bug in the view definition. Those are the snapshots".

Snapshots, did I say? Wash my mouth out with soap and water....

Thanks, Jonathan, for the enlightening post. Paul Received on Sat Jul 13 2002 - 13:53:50 CDT