I guess it also works that if your index is parallel but the table not partitioned then the query will serialize. Though, I have seen parallel fast full index scans on non-partitioned tables. Would this also be because of the indexes created in parallel? Figures with oracle there is always a tradeoff. Create indexes in parallel saves a massive amount of time but then you have to alter them noparallel. Mike ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tanel Põder" <tanel.poder.003@xxxxxxx> To: <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Tuesday, August 03, 2004 1:57 PM Subject: Re: parallel execution on partitioned tables (was: Oracle 9.2.0.5 "10046" Tracing ...) > Btw, if you hint your query to use full table scans now or not to use your > bitmap index (this means optimizer won't consider accessing your "parallel" > index), the query will run in serial, because optimizer only sees noparallel > objects. > > It works the other way too, that if your table is parallel, but it's > contents are accessed from a noparallel index, optimizer won't take the > parallel degree of underlying table into account... > > Tanel. > > 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 > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 -----------------------------------------------------------------