Re: Index question

From: Jonathan Lewis <>
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 22:32:46 +0100
Message-ID: <>

<> wrote in message On Aug 25, 1:22 pm, joel garry <> wrote:

> As Michel and Jonathan noted, it is probably corruption.
> We need to execute a rebuild for this index anyway (we just deleted
> 250 million "increasing sequence type" rows which is making MIN
> queries such as this horrific in terms of performance).

I'd favour an optimizer error over corruption - the plan that got the right answer had to find the bottom left corner of each index and scan from there - so there wasn't any corruption in that area of the index partitions.

If you have time, I'd suggest coalesce rather than rebuild.

On a related topic - if you've got an index that's inconsistent with the table, then a coalesce (or rebuild that scans the index) could still leave you with an inconsistent index.


Jonathan Lewis

Author: Cost Based Oracle: Fundamentals

The Co-operative Oracle Users' FAQ
Received on Tue Aug 25 2009 - 16:32:46 CDT

Original text of this message