alter table move tablespace
works after 9i and locks the entire table for the duration of the operation.
Not sure but I think the corresponding indexes will be made unisable and must be rebuilt.
It is possible to be necessary to issue
alter table enable row movement;
before issuing alter table move
I checked and really in this case row movement is not necessary, however I do not agree that it means enable movement between partitions. It rather means enable rowid change.
Row movement is for sure necessary when you do segment shring in 10g or when you do flashback table and that has nothing to deal with the partitioning. That's why, since move tablespace leads to rowid changes, I presumed that enable row movement could be necessary
Davey23uk (many Dave's here :-) )
I have not said that row movement has nothing to deal witgh partitioning. Of course it has. What I say is that row movement is ALSO necesary for operations like shrink and flashback, and these operations are permitted and defined on non-partitioned tables as well. So, Slimdave is not wrong here, just his first statement is not fully precise.