Re: Oracle 9.2.0.5 and sqlldr problems

From: Paul Drake <drak0nian_at_yahoo.com>
Date: 19 May 2004 14:43:27 -0700
Message-ID: <1ac7c7b3.0405191343.153e798c@posting.google.com>

shuli_at_iupui.edu (Shu Li) wrote in message news:<c0e204dd.0405190648.46d42c0c_at_posting.google.com>...
> Hi,
>
> I had the same problem, sqlldr failed with ora-01001, after upgrading to 9.2.0.5.
> Could someone tell me the number if there is already a tar opened
> Thanks
>
> -Shu Li
> Data Warehouse Archetect
> Mcknight Associates
>
>
> drak0nian_at_yahoo.com (Paul Drake) wrote in message news:<1ac7c7b3.0404231947.7ce810d1_at_posting.google.com>...
> > Don Seiler <don_at_seiler.us> wrote in message news:<pan.2004.04.23.19.24.51.594468_at_seiler.us>...
> > > On Thu, 22 Apr 2004 14:07:07 +0000, Don Seiler wrote:
> > > > Do you know off-hand how I can downgrade? Is it simply a matter of
> > > > re-installing the 9.2.0.4 patchset over the 9.2.0.5? Yes I realize this
> > > > deserves an RTFM but I thought I'd ask.
> > >
> > > Nevermind I found this on metalink in the patch README:
> > >
> > > De-Installation of the Patch Set
> > >
> > > There is no mechanism provided for de-installing patch sets. If you are concerned about being able to de-install a patch set, Oracle recommends that you back up your software installation before applying the patch set.
> > >
> > > If you must de-install a patch set, Oracle recommends one of the following procedures (in order of preference):
> > >
> > > * Restore the ORACLE_HOME from backup.
> > > * Re-install the baseline release and any patch sets previously
> > > applied, up to but not including this patch set.
> > >
> > > Regardless of how you de-install a patch set, please contact Oracle Support
> > > Services to verify that the problem you are encountering is being addressed.
> >
> > Don,
> >
> > Sorry - didn't catch you in time.
> > I've never de-installed a patchset.
> > I've just wiped the box (think del HKLM\Software\Oracle) and re-installed.
> >
> > Paul

Shu,

sorry, no solution yet. TAR in progress. our exact condition is that secondary indexes are being left unusable after a direct load.

Paul Received on Wed May 19 2004 - 16:43:27 CDT