How to find tables in a schema that start with NUM_ whose data is more than 0 records.
Eg:
Consider I'm a couple of schemas
Schema1
Schema2
Schema3
Schema1 has tables:
NUM_table11 (has 0 records)
NUM_table12 (has 20 records)
DummyTable1 (has 10 records)
Schema2 has tables:
NUM_table21 (has 0 records)
NUM_table22 (has 20 records)
DummyTable2 (has 10 records)
Schema3 has tables:
NUM_table31 (has 0 records)
NUM_table32 (has 20 records)
DummyTable3 (has 10 records)
I want to get only Schema2 tables, whose name starts with NUM_ and has more than 0 records.
i.e, in this case NUM_table22
Can anyone help on achieving this?
I don't have your tables (and don't feel like creating ones either), so I'll show it on another example - looking for the EMP tables throughout my database.
Connect as a privileged user, the one that has access to DBA_TABLES (as you want to search all users, right?). One of those is SYS, if you don't have any other.
Then write a PL/SQL block which looks into the DBA_TABLES, searches for tables whose name begins with EMP. Dynamic SQL (i.e. execute immediate) counts rows in those tables and - if it is a positive number - returns that table as an output.
SQL> show user
USER is "SYS"
SQL> set serveroutput on
SQL>
SQL> declare
2 l_cnt number;
3 begin
4 for cur_r in (select owner, table_name
5 from dba_tables
6 where table_name like 'EMP%'
7 )
8 loop
9 execute immediate 'select count(*) from ' || cur_r.owner ||'.'||
10 cur_r.table_name into l_cnt;
11 if l_cnt > 0 then
12 dbms_output.put_line(cur_r.owner ||'.'|| cur_r.table_name ||' = ' || l_cnt);
13 end if;
14 end loop;
15 end;
16 /
HR.EMPLOYEES = 107
SCOTT.EMP = 14
PL/SQL procedure successfully completed.
SQL>
In my databases, there are two such tables:
one is owned by HR, its name is EMPLOYEES and contains 107 rows
another one is owned by SCOTT, its name is EMP and contains 14 rows
I believe that you shouldn't have any problems in adjusting that code to your needs.
I'm not sure why would you want to search only through schema2; in that case, it is simpler to connect as schema2 and do the same job using user_tables (or all_tables) (so you don't have to connect as a privileged user).
Or, if you want to pick the user within that code, you'd add yet another condition into the where clause (line #6):
and owner = 'SCHEMA2'
Littlefoot's answer would work but may take longer. Assuming stats has been collected the following SQL should give you want you want and much faster. If stats are not fresh then it can give wrong result.
select * from DBA_TABLES where TABLE_NAME like 'NUM_%' and NUM_ROWS > 0
Related
I am trying to use the following statement for the Delete process and it has to delete around 23566424 Rows, but oracle takes almost 3 hours to complete the process and we have already created an index on " SCHEDULE_DATE_KEY" but still, the process is very slow.Can someone advise on how to make Deletes faster in oracle
DELETE
FROM
EDWSOURCE.SCHEDULE_DAY_F
WHERE
SCHEDULE_DATE_KEY >
(
SELECT
LAST_PAYROLL_DATE_KEY
FROM
EDWSOURCE.LAST_PAYROLL_DATE
WHERE
CURRENT_FLAG = 'Y'
);
I don't think any index will help here, probably Oracle will decide the best approach is a full table scan to delete 20M rows from 300M. It is deleting at a rate of over 2000 rows per second, which isn't bad. In fact any additional indexes will slow it down as it has to delete the row entry from the index as well.
A quicker approach could be to create a new table of the rows you want to keep, something like:
create table EDWSOURCE.SCHEDULE_DAY_F_KEEP
as
select * from EDWSOURCE.SCHEDULE_DAY_F
where SCHEDULE_DATE_KEY <=
(
SELECT
LAST_PAYROLL_DATE_KEY
FROM
EDWSOURCE.LAST_PAYROLL_DATE
WHERE
CURRENT_FLAG = 'Y'
);
Then recreate any constraints and indexes to use the new table.
Finally drop the old table and rename the new one.
You can try testing a filtered table move. This has an online clause. So you can do this while the application is still running.
Note 12.2 and later the indexes will remain valid. In earlier versions you will need to rebuild the indexes as they will become invalid. Good Luck
Move a Table
Create and populate a new test table.
DROP TABLE t1 PURGE;
CREATE TABLE t1 AS
SELECT level AS id,
'Description for ' || level AS description
FROM dual
CONNECT BY level <= 100;
COMMIT;
Check the contents of the table.
SELECT COUNT(*) AS total_rows,
MIN(id) AS min_id,
MAX(id) AS max_id
FROM t1;
TOTAL_ROWS MIN_ID MAX_ID
---------- ---------- ----------
100 1 100
SQL>
Move the table, filtering out rows with an ID value greater than 50.
ALTER TABLE t1 MOVE ONLINE
INCLUDING ROWS WHERE id <= 50;
Check the contents of the table.
SELECT COUNT(*) AS total_rows,
MIN(id) AS min_id,
MAX(id) AS max_id
FROM t1;
TOTAL_ROWS MIN_ID MAX_ID
---------- ---------- ----------
50 1 50
SQL>
The rows with an ID value between 51 and 100 have been removed.
As mentioned above if maybe best to PARTITION the table abs drop a PARTITION every N number of days as part of a daily task.
Hi I have a requirement to scan through the schema and identify the tables which are redundant (candidate for dropping) ,so i did a select in DBA_Dependencies to check whether the tables are being used in any of the DB object types like (Procedure, package body, views, Materialized views....) i was able to find some tables and excluded the tables ,since i also need to capture the total counts, when the table was last loaded/used is there a automated way to select only selected tables (not found in dependencies list) and capture the counts and also when it was used/loaded
Difficulty - so many tables 500+
i have used the below query
Query 1
select table_name,
to_number(extractvalue(xmltype(dbms_xmlgen.getxml('select count(*) c from '||owner||'.'||table_name)),'/ROWSET/ROW/C')) as count
from all_tables
where owner = 'SCHEMA_NAME'
Query 2
select owner, table_name, num_rows, sample_size, last_analyzed from all_tables;
Query 1 Result
Filter Table_name=CUST_ORDER
OWNER TABLE_NAME COUNT SAMPLE_SIZE LAST_ANALYZED
ABCD CUST_ORDER 1083 1023 01.01.2020
Query 2 Result
Filter Table_name=CUST_ORDER
OWNER TABLE_NAME NUM_ROWS SAMPLE_SIZE LAST_ANALYZED
ABCD CUST_ORDER 1023 1023 01.01.2020
Question
Query 1 - Results not matching when compared with query 2 ,since the same table and filter is applied
in both the queries and why the results are not matching ?
but when i randomly checked other filter it is matching , does any one know the reason ?
Upon further testing i encountered an error ,what does this error signify permissions ?
ORA-29913: error in executing ODCIEXTTABLEOPEN callout
ORA-29400: data cartridge error
KUP-04040: file **-**.csv in ****_***_***_***** not found
29913. 00000 - "error in executing %s callout"
*Cause: The execution of the specified callout caused an error.
*Action: Examine the error messages take appropriate action.
The number you see on all_tables is a point in time capture of the number of rows. It will only be updated if the statistics are rebuilt for that table.
Here is an example:
CREATE TABLE t1 AS
SELECT *
FROM all_objects;
SELECT t.num_rows
FROM all_tables t
WHERE t.table_name = 'T1';
-- 78570
SELECT COUNT(*)
FROM t1;
-- 78570
The stats and the physical number of rows match!
INSERT INTO t1
SELECT *
FROM all_objects ao
WHERE rownum <= 5;
-- 5 rows inserted
SELECT t.num_rows
FROM all_tables t
WHERE t.table_name = 'T1';
-- 78570
SELECT COUNT(*)
FROM t1;
-- 78575
Here we have the mis-match because rows were inserted (or maybe even deleted), but the stats for the table have not been updated. Let's update them:
BEGIN
dbms_stats.gather_table_stats(ownname => 'SCHEMA',
tabname => 'T1');
END;
/
SELECT t.num_rows
FROM all_tables t
WHERE t.table_name = 'T1';
-- 78575
Now you can see the rows match. Using the value from all_tables may be good enough for your research (and will certainly be faster to query than counting every table).
Query - 1 is actual data of the table and hence it is accurate data. One can rely on this query's output.
Query - 2 is not actual data. It is the data captured when table was last analyzed and one should not be dependant on this query for finding number of records in the table.
You can gather the stats on this table and execute the query-2 then you will find the same data as query-1
If records are not inserted or deleted from the table after stats are gathered, then query-1 and query-2 data will match for that table.
I have 3 tables that are related to each other:
ACCOUNTS
CARDS
TRANSACTIONS
I want to change the money amount from account every time I execute a new transaction. I want to decrease the account value with each new move.
I tried writing this trigger:
create or replace trigger ceva_trig1
before insert on miscari
for each row
declare
new_val micari.valoare%tipe := new.valoare;
begin
update conturi
set sold = sold - new_val
where nrcont = (select nrcont
from conturi
join carti_de_credit on conturi.nrcont = carti_de_credit.nrcont
join miscari on carti_de_credit.nr_card = miscari.nrcard)
and sold >= new_val;
end;
May anyone help me correct the syntax that crashes here?
I've created those tables with minimal number of columns, just to make trigger compile.
SQL> create table conturi
2 (sold number,
3 nrcont number
4 );
Table created.
SQL> create table miscari
2 (valoare number,
3 nrcard number
4 );
Table created.
SQL> create table carti_de_credit
2 (nrcont number,
3 nr_card number
4 );
Table created.
Trigger:
SQL> create or replace trigger ceva_trig1
2 before insert on miscari
3 for each row
4 begin
5 update conturi c
6 set c.sold = c.sold - :new.valoare
7 where c.nrcont = (select r.nrcont
8 from carti_de_credit r
9 where r.nrcont = c.nrcont
10 and r.nr_card = :new.nrcard
11 )
12 and c.sold >= :new.valoare;
13 end;
14 /
Trigger created.
SQL>
How does it differ from your code? Like this:
SQL> create or replace trigger ceva_trig1
2 before insert on miscari
3 for each row
4 declare
5 new_val micari.valoare%tipe := new.valoare;
6 begin
7 update conturi
8 set sold = sold - new_val
9 where nrcont = (select nrcont
10 from conturi
11 join carti_de_credit on conturi.nrcont = carti_de_credit.nrcont
12 join miscari on carti_de_credit.nr_card = miscari.nrcard)
13 and sold >= new_val;
14 end;
15 /
Warning: Trigger created with compilation errors.
SQL> show err
Errors for TRIGGER CEVA_TRIG1:
LINE/COL ERROR
-------- -----------------------------------------------------------------
2/11 PL/SQL: Item ignored
2/26 PLS-00208: identifier 'TIPE' is not a legal cursor attribute
4/3 PL/SQL: SQL Statement ignored
10/15 PL/SQL: ORA-00904: "NEW_VAL": invalid identifier
10/15 PLS-00320: the declaration of the type of this expression is incomplete or malformed
SQL>
Explained:
it isn't tipe but type
new column values are referenced with a colon, i.e. :new.valoare
you shouldn't make typos regarding table & column names; it is miscari, not micari
it is bad practice to write query which references the same table (miscari, line #12) trigger is created for. As it is being changed, you can't select values from it as it is mutating
lucky you, you don't have to do that at all. How? Have a look at my code.
Attempting to maintain an ongoing for transactions in one table in another table is always a bad idea. Admittedly in an extremely few cases it's necessary, but should be the design of last resort not an initial one; even when necessary it's still a bad idea and therefore requires much more processing and complexity.
In this instance after you correct all the errors #Littlefoot points out then your real problems begin. What do you do when: (Using Littlefoot's table definitions)
I delete a row from miscari?
I update a row in miscari?
The subselect for nrcont returns 0 rows?
The condition sold >= new_val is False?
If any of conditions occur the value for sold in conturi is incorrect and may not be correctable from values in the source table - miscari. An that list may be just the beginning of the issues you face.
Suggestion: Abandon the idea of keeping an running account of transaction values. Instead derive it when needed. You can create a view that does that and select from the view.
So maybe instead of "create table conturi ..."
I am using ALL_TABLES/ALL_TAB_COLUMNS to get count of tables in my schema (EDW_SRC) and another schema(EDW_STG). I get correct counts when i run the query in my sql developer as shown below. But if i put the same query inside a trigger, i get wrong count for other schema(EDW_STG).
Please refer below code:
(This is just a sample code to replicate the issue, not my business requirement. I am referring ALL_TAB_COLUMNS in my actual code to get the number of columns in a particular table in different schema, for which i have Select access.)
select user from dual;
USER
-----
EDW_SRC
DROP TABLE ABC;
Table ABC dropped.
CREATE TABLE ABC(ID NUMBER);
Table ABC created.
select count(1) EDW_STG_CNT
from all_tables
where owner='EDW_STG';--Different Schema
EDW_STG_CNT
----------
101
select count(1) EDW_SRC_CNT
from all_tables
where owner='EDW_SRC';--My Schema
EDW_SRC_CNT
------------
1554
create or replace trigger trig_test_dml_abc
before insert on abc
DECLARE
V_STG_CNT number :=NULL;
V_SRC_CNT number :=NULL;
begin
DBMS_OUTPUT.PUT_LINE('***** TRIGGER OUTPUT *****');
select count(1) into V_SRC_CNT from all_tables
where owner='EDW_SRC'; --My Schema
DBMS_OUTPUT.PUT_LINE('My Schema EDW_SRC_CNT :'||V_SRC_CNT);
select count(1) into V_STG_CNT from all_tables
where owner='EDW_STG'; --Different Schema
DBMS_OUTPUT.PUT_LINE('Different Schema EDW_STG_CNT :'||V_STG_CNT);
end;
Trigger TRIG_TEST_DML_ABC compiled
INSERT INTO ABC VALUES (2);
1 row inserted.
***** TRIGGER OUTPUT *****
My Schema EDW_SRC_CNT :1554
Different Schema EDW_STG_CNT :2
The Different Schema count should be 101. Why is it coming as 2.
Oracle Version:
Oracle Database 11g Enterprise Edition Release 11.2.0.4.0 - 64bit Production
Thanks
K
I'm using Oracle on database server, from an XP client, using VB6 and ADO. In one transaction, I'm inserting one record into a parent table, which has a trigger and sequence to create a unique recordid, then that recordid is used for the relationship to a child table for a variable number of inserts to the child table. For performance, this is being sent in one execute command from my client app. For instance (simplified example):
declare Recordid int;
begin
insert into ParentTable (_field list_) Values (_data list_);
Select ParentTableSequence.currVal into Recordid from dual;
insert into ChildTable (RecordID, _field list_) Values (Recordid, _data list_);
insert into ChildTable (RecordID, _field list_) Values (Recordid, _data list_);
... multiple, variable number of additional ChildTable inserts
commit;
end;
This is working fine. My question is: I also need to return to the client the Recordid that was created for the inserts. On SQL Server, I can add something like a select to Scope_Identity() after the commit to return a recordset to the client with the unique id.
But how can I do something similar for Oracle (doesn't have to be a recordset, I just need that long integer value)? I've tried a number of things based on results from searching the 'net, but have failed in finding a solution.
These two lines can be compressed into a single statement:
-- insert into ParentTable (field list) Values (data list);
-- Select ParentTableSequence.currVal into Recordid from dual;
insert into ParentTable (field list) Values (data list)
returning ParentTable.ID into Recordid;
If you want to pass the ID back to the calling program you will need to define your program as a stored procedure or function, returning Recordid as an OUT parameter or a RETURN value respectively.
Edit
MarkL commented:
This is more of an Oracle PL/SQL
question than anything else, I
believe.
I confess that I no nothing about ADO, so I don't know whether the following example will work in your case. It involves building some infrastructure which allows us to pass an array of values into a procedure. The following example creates a new department, promotes an existing employee to manage it and assigns two new hires.
SQL> create or replace type new_emp_t as object
2 (ename varchar2(10)
3 , sal number (7,2)
4 , job varchar2(10));
5 /
Type created.
SQL>
SQL> create or replace type new_emp_nt as table of new_emp_t;
2 /
Type created.
SQL>
SQL> create or replace procedure pop_new_dept
2 (p_dname in dept.dname%type
3 , p_loc in dept.loc%type
4 , p_mgr in emp.empno%type
5 , p_staff in new_emp_nt
6 , p_deptno out dept.deptno%type)
7 is
8 l_deptno dept.deptno%type;
9 begin
10 insert into dept
11 (dname, loc)
12 values
13 (p_dname, p_loc)
14 returning deptno into l_deptno;
15 update emp
16 set deptno = l_deptno
17 , job = 'MANAGER'
18 , mgr = 7839
19 where empno = p_mgr;
20 forall i in p_staff.first()..p_staff.last()
21 insert into emp
22 (ename
23 , sal
24 , job
25 , hiredate
26 , mgr
27 , deptno)
28 values
29 (p_staff(i).ename
30 , p_staff(i).sal
31 , p_staff(i).job
32 , sysdate
33 , p_mgr
34 , l_deptno);
35 p_deptno := l_deptno;
36 end pop_new_dept;
37 /
Procedure created.
SQL>
SQL> set serveroutput on
SQL>
SQL> declare
2 dept_staff new_emp_nt;
3 new_dept dept.deptno%type;
4 begin
5 dept_staff := new_emp_nt(new_emp_t('MARKL', 4200, 'DEVELOPER')
6 , new_emp_t('APC', 2300, 'DEVELOPER'));
7 pop_new_dept('IT', 'BRNO', 7844, dept_staff, new_dept);
8 dbms_output.put_line('New DEPTNO = '||new_dept);
9 end;
10 /
New DEPTNO = 70
PL/SQL procedure successfully completed.
SQL>
The primary keys for both DEPT and EMP are assigned through triggers. The FORALL syntax is a very efficient way of inserting records (it also works for UPDATE and DELETE). This could be written as a FUNCTION to return the new DEPTNO instead, but it is generally considered better practice to use a PROCEDURE when inserting, updating or deleting.
That would be my preferred approach but I admit it's not to everybody's taste.
Edit 2
With regards to performance, bulk operations using FORALL will definitely perform better than a handful of individual inserts. In SQL, set operations are always preferable to record-by-record. However, if we are dealing with only a handful of records each time it can be hard to notice the difference.
Building a PL/SQL collection (what you think of as a temporary table in SQL Server) can be expensive in terms of memory. This is especially true if there are many users running the code, because it comes out of the session level allocation of memory, not the Shared Global Area. When we're dealing with a large number of records it is better to populate an array in chunks, perhaps using the BULK COLLECT syntax with a LIMIT clause.
The Oracle online documentation set is pretty good. The PL/SQL Developer's Guide has a whole chapter on Collections. Find out more.