I think you're running into a problem with the Hakan factor. This is a number used by the bitmap index algorithms to limit the number of rows that Oracle assumes can be stored in a single block. It is (generally) dictated at table creation time by the number and type of non-null columns. Check tab$.spare1 just after creating a table. Things can go wrong with partitioned tables, though, as the table has a Hakan factor, but in your case you've created a table to exchange with it that has a different Hakan factor. The closest reference to your problem comes from (a) minimize_records_per_block, which can only be used in the absence of bitmap indexes on a table and resets the Hakan factor, and (b) a note about dropping bitmap indexes before your first compress a data segment in a partitioned table. Regards Jonathan Lewis http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk The Co-operative Oracle Users' FAQ http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/faq/ind_faq.html March 2004 Hotsos Symposium - The Burden of Proof Dynamic Sampling - an investigation March 2004 Charlotte OUG (www.cltoug.org) CBO Tutorial April 2004 Iceland June 2004 UK - Optimising Oracle Seminar ----- Original Message ----- From: "Senthil Ramanujam" <sramanujam@xxxxxxxxxxx> To: <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Monday, March 01, 2004 4:45 PM Subject: ORA - 14642 : partition exchange error > Hi All, > > I came across an interesting issue and thought i could get some info > from the list. i did google around and metalinked, but no luck. > > Environment: 9.2.0.1 - Solaris 8 / HP-11i > > Actually, i was getting ORA-14642 when i was trying to exchange > partition on one of my core tables. The example given below is how i can > reproduce with simple example table. it shows me that if the table row > length exceeds 8 characters, then it throws an error. If i reduce the > column(mytext) length from 5 to 4 or anything less than 5, then > everything runs fine. > > I know it doesnt makes sense to create table and then alter the same. it > was the old script and we were able to fix this issue by creating the > right column and constraints(i mean, no "alter" command run). > > I was just curious to know why it was failing and it seems like it was > failing based on row length in this case. Originally it was failing on > my hp(11i?) box and i tried the same on Solaris(8) and it failed there too. > > any thoughts? has anyone seen this before? am i running into any known > issues? > > appreciate it. thanks. > > senthil ---------------------------------------------------------------- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com ---------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe send email to: oracle-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx put 'unsubscribe' in the subject line. -- Archives are at //www.freelists.org/archives/oracle-l/ FAQ is at //www.freelists.org/help/fom-serve/cache/1.html -----------------------------------------------------------------