Re: Regarding some update SQL with a running sequence

On 29 Dec 2005 10:57:16 -0800, "saurangshu" <saurangshu@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

>It perfectly worked for me. Thanks a million for such simple solution.
>Just a last followup question -
>The update sql seems to be very innocent with an explained cost of 3
>for a 50000 row update but it takes long time (about 500s or more) to
>update the table. Do you think bulk update in PL/SQL should be a better
>choice than these? Or is it theoretically it will be slower. Just any
>thought if you have.
>
>Thanks again.


It will always be slower, as it includes fetching of the data.
The general guideline in Oracle has been always
- anything which *can* be done non-procedurally *should* be done
non-procedurally.

--
Sybrand Bakker, Senior Oracle DBA
.