Re: DBMS_REPAIR, 8.1.7

Ok, I was able to find the corrupted blocks succesfully. But now, I want to use DBMS_REPAIR.FIX_CORRUPT_BLOCKS to mark them as bad, and I am getting:

DECLARE num_fix INT;
*
ERROR at line 1:
ORA-00600: internal error code, arguments: [kdrp_chkblk_1], [0], [], [], [], [], [], []
ORA-06512: at "SYS.DBMS_REPAIR", line 287 ORA-06512: at line 4

Any ideas? Thanks!

"John Oakes" <john_at_networkproductions.net> wrote in message news:EWVvb.27783$KI4.1449_at_twister.tampabay.rr.com...
>
> "Daniel Morgan" <damorgan_at_x.washington.edu> wrote in message
> news:1069538996.149245_at_yasure...
> > John Oakes wrote:
> >
> > > Object does not exist. Why? What schema should it be located in?
> > >
> > > <snipped>
> > >>
> > >>what happens when you log in as sys or system and do
> > >>
> > >>desc dbms_repair
> > >>
> >
> > DBMS_REPAIR is owned by SYS and built with the creation of the SYSTEM
> > tablespace. If it isn't there ...
> >
> > SELECT COUNT(*)
> > FROM dba_objects
> > WHERE object_name = 'DBMS_REPAIR';
> >
> > Then shut the database down ASAP.
> > Log back on as SYS and bring it back up in restricted mode
> > Then run catalog.sql and catproc.sql before letting anyone touch
anything.
> >
> > If DBMS_REPAIR is missing one can only wonder at what else may be
> > missing too.
>
> Thank you for the information. I was actually logging in as system
instead
> of sys, which is why I couldn't find the object. I ran your query above
and
> it found them, so I knew they had to be there. I logged in a sys and was
> able to run the procedures. In my own defense, I am a devloper, not a
DBA.
> I just inherited this roll because I am the only one here that knew UNIX
> after our old DBA left. Again, thanks for the help! I will cross my
> fingers and see what data I can recover.
>
> -John
>
>
> > --
> > Daniel Morgan
> > http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/oad/oad_crs.asp
> > http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/aoa/aoa_crs.asp
> > damorgan_at_x.washington.edu
> > (replace 'x' with a 'u' to reply)
> >
> >
>
>
>
Received on Sat Nov 22 2003 - 22:24:02 CST