Re: Query Improvement
- From: "amerar@xxxxxxx" <amerar@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2007 08:29:56 -0700
On Aug 30, 10:18 am, Anurag Varma <avora...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Aug 30, 11:12 am, "ame...@xxxxxxx" <ame...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi All,
I'm hoping someone can help me. I have the query below with the
explain plan. It takes more than 10 minutes to complete. There are
only 128 records in the table named INDUSTRY and about 150,000 records
in the table named BROKER_REP_LOOKUP, and BROKER_REP_LOOKUP is
actually a snapshot.
There are also the following indexes on the tables:
INDUSTRY: Index on IND_ID column.
BROKER_REP_LOOKUP: Functional Index on IND_ID. The function is NVL.
I see the table access is FULL on both the table and snapshot. I'm
not sure why this is, or why tables with such a small amount of
records takes so long.
I'm open to any help.
select name,ind_code
from industry a where exists
(select 'x' from broker_rep_lookup b where b.pdf = 'E' and
(b.participating = 'Y' or b.participating is null) and a.ind_code
= b.ind_id)
order by a.name;
Execution Plan
----------------------------------------------------------
0 SELECT STATEMENT Optimizer=CHOOSE (Cost=28 Card=13
Bytes=260)
1 0 SORT (ORDER BY) (Cost=28 Card=13 Bytes=260)
2 1 FILTER
3 2 TABLE ACCESS (FULL) OF 'INDUSTRY' (Cost=1 Card=13
Bytes=260)
4 2 TABLE ACCESS (FULL) OF 'BROKER_REP_LOOKUP' (Cost=2411
Card=3026 Bytes=21182)
Thanks in advance for your time.
You have a NVL(ind_id) index on broker_rep_lookup ... However, in the
query you do not use a NVL function for the join.
So thats why probably the index does not get used.
Anurag
Well, I tried the query below adding the NVL function, and received
the same results:
select name,ind_code
from industry a where exists
(select 'x' from broker_rep_lookup b where b.pdf = 'E' and
(b.participating = 'Y' or b.participating is null) and a.ind_code
= NVL(b.ind_id,500))
order by a.name;
.
- References:
- Query Improvement
- From: amerar@xxxxxxx
- Re: Query Improvement
- From: Anurag Varma
- Query Improvement
- Prev by Date: Re: QUESTION ON SEQUENCE VALUES - 9iR2
- Next by Date: Re: ORA-04031: unable to allocate 2097152 bytes of shared memory ("shared pool","unknown object","hash-join subh","QERHJ Hash Table Entries")
- Previous by thread: Re: Query Improvement
- Next by thread: Re: Query Improvement
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|