Re: Parallel update on non-partitioned tables - allowed at 10/11g?

  • From: cam <kadmon@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: Greg Rahn <greg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2009 22:06:05 +0000

Thanks for taking the time Greg.

I am at the point of running a test case myself and, as soon as I can
get into MOS (about which the less said, the better..), raise an SR to
get a definitive answer from Oracle. Not that I don't believe your
test case, but I'd like to have them admit the docs are 2 major
versions out of date...


On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 8:11 PM, Greg Rahn <greg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 5:30 AM, cam <kadmon@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> I know this issue comes up reasonably frequently in one form or another, but
>> I would just like to get opinions on a simple question: is it possible to
>> run parallel updates on a non-partitioned table at 10g and later?
> Just some further clarification on PX limitations (dependent on what
> version the table was created under):
> For tables created prior to Oracle9i Database release version 9.0.1 or
> tables that do not have the parallel DML itl invariant property, the
> DOP is equal to the number of partitions or subpartitions. That means
> that, if the table is not partitioned, the query runs in serial. To
> see what tables do not have this property, issue the following
> statement:
> SELECT, FROM obj$ o, tab$ t, user$ u
> WHERE o.obj# = t.obj# AND o.owner# = u.user#
>  AND bitand(,536870912) != 536870912;
> --
> Regards,
> Greg Rahn

Other related posts: