Re: Block DML!?

"Daniel Morgan" <damorgan_at_x.washington.edu> wrote in message news:1091770680.453840_at_yasure...

>
> DBMS_REDEFINITION does insert records into a new table .

I know it does. It inserts every row that was in the *old* table. Which the OP explicitly did NOT want to happen. He wants a brand new table with zero records in it. As soon as he insists on that point, dbms_redefinition is out of consideration. I think the phrase in the manuals was "you cannot horizontally subset your records with dbms_redefinition"... which was a glorious way of saying "you cannot supply a where clause". And hence, if the original table has 300 million rows in it, or whatever, then so will the new one.

>.. the one
> defined in the redefinition procedure as the interim table. And, as you
> indicate, the price is quite a bit lower.

The price is irrelevant if the package doesn't do what the poster has quite clearly asked of it: namely, the effective creation of a new, blank table into which fresh records can be inserted and the simultaneous creation of an old table, stuffed full of archivable records. If that's not a job for exchanging partitions, I don't know what is. And if that's the solution to a specific business need, then the cost is largely irrelevant.

Regards
HJR
> --
> Daniel A. Morgan
> University of Washington
> damorgan_at_x.washington.edu
> (replace 'x' with 'u' to respond)
>
Received on Fri Aug 06 2004 - 06:26:35 CDT