RE: bitmapped index with "parallel" OK?
- From: "Bobak, Mark" <Mark.Bobak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <tomday2@xxxxxxxxx>, "Oracle-L Freelists" <Oracle-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2006 12:43:53 -0400
Thomas,
Did you try a lookup on MetaLink w/ the ORA-600/7445 lookup tool?
Log in to MetaLink, click the "Knowledge" tab. From there, Click
"Database" on the left side. Now, in the top center, third item under
"Database" is "ORA-600 Error Lookup by Argument".
Hope that helps,
-Mark
--
Mark J. Bobak
Senior Oracle Architect
ProQuest Information & Learning
There is nothing so useless as doing efficiently that which shouldn't be
done at all. -Peter F. Drucker, 1909-2005
________________________________
From: oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Thomas Day
Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2006 12:31 PM
To: Oracle-L Freelists
Subject: bitmapped index with "parallel" OK?
Tried to send this but I never saw it on the mail list. So I've
forwarded it. Sorry if this ends up as a double post.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Thomas Day <tomday2@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Oct 25, 2006 12:05 PM
Subject: bitmapped index with "parallel" OK?
To: oracle-l < oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >
I'm creating bitmapped indexes on a non-partitioned table. If I add
"parallel" to the mix of options I get an end-of-channel and the
database takes a core dump. If I'm creating local bitmapped indexes on
a partitioned table the parallel option is no problem. Also, parallel
does not seem to be a problem with b-tree indexes (partitioned table or
no).
I've been through the documentation and tired Google but I can't find a
definitive answer.
Is "parallel" allowed with bitmapped indexes on non-partitioned tables?
Our banner says -
Oracle9i Enterprise Edition Release 9.2.0.7.0 - 64bit Production
With the Partitioning, Real Application Clusters, OLAP and Oracle Data
Mining options
JServer Release 9.2.0.7.0 - Production
OS is AIX.
Other related posts:
