1DGT_ITEMEFFORTDATA_DAILYHCLT_IDX_DGT_IFDITEMID4
2DGT_ITEMEFFORTDATA_DAILYHCLT_IDX_DGT_IFDITEMTYPE3
3DGT_ITEMEFFORTDATA_DAILYHCLT_IDX_DGT_IFDOWNERID2
4DGT_ITEMEFFORTDATA_DAILYHCLT_IDX_DGT_IFDOWNERTYPE1
There is no index on DGT_ITEMEFFORTDATA_TEMP table
I have two tables with 113M records in DWH_BILL_DET & 103M in prd_rerate_chg_que and Im running following merge query, which is running for 13 hrs to update records, which is quiet longer time.
SQL> explain plan for MERGE /*+ parallel (rq, 16) */ INTO DWH_BILL_DET rq USING (SELECT rated_que_rowid, detail_rerate_flag_code, rerate_sel_key,
now my code is using UNION ALL to get output as in table2 select col1,col1,'Segment1' col3,Segment1 col4 from table1 union all select col1,col1,'Segment2' col3,Segment2 from table1 union all select col1,col1,'Segment3' col3,Segment3 from table1
But the problem is the performance is realy bad.Is there any way i can do this without using union all? The time that take to execute this is not exceptable.
Oracle UNION ALL performance issue: when I try to run below SQL query separately SQL part1 and SQL part2 it takes some seconds only but if I run together with group by and without group by it take much time.
SELECT AVG(date_completed-login_date),to_char(to_date(login_date), 'YYYY') as wYear FROM ( SELECT test.date_completed 'date_completed',sample.login_date 'login_date') FROM sample test where (some conditions) ) ---SQL part 1 UNION ALL
I am running the following delete query and it has been running for over 2hrs:
delete from dw.ACCOUNT_FACT where rowid in (select rowid from DW.ACCOUNT_FACT minus select max(rowid) from DW.ACCOUNT_FACT
[Code]..
Here is the explan plain result:
explain plan for delete from dw.ACCOUNT_FACT where rowid in (select rowid from DW.ACCOUNT_FACT minus select max(rowid) from DW.ACCOUNT_FACT group by CRTORD_FIPS_CD, LAST_PAYMENT_DT, ORDER_NUM,
Predicate Information (identified by operation id): ---------------------------------------------------
2 - access(ROWID="$kkqu_col_1")
I have all constraints disabled. How do I make this delete finish faster? We're trying to remove duplicates from this table using the criteria giving in the statement.
We have a large customer table so first thought was to partition.Also we see two union alls in the plan - can we introduce parallelism? Below is the plan - have attached a text file if difficult to read
I have a SQL query where I am making UNION of two select statements. The table that I am joining in each select statement have indexes defined for those tables.
Now the UNION of the two select statements again in enclosed in an inline view , from which I fetching my final field values.
The select statements inside the inline view returns huge number of row (like 50 million rows).
The whole query fails with time out.
Is there a way to pass Oracle Hints so that Oracle uses indexes?
I am writing a query and I did get it to work but it shouldn't be this hard, I feel like I am doing something wrong, and there has to be a more elegent solution.
This query works:
SELECT a.d FROM ( SELECT S_ID a, LOOKUP_DESC d, S_CODE f FROM SSS JOIN LOOKUP ON S_CODE LIKE LOOKUP_CODE UNION ALL
[Code]...
I feel like I should be able to execute the query like this: This query doesn't work:
SELECT a.d FROM ( SELECT S_ID a, LOOKUP_DESC d, S_CODE f FROM SSS JOIN LOOKUP ON S_CODE LIKE LOOKUP_CODE
I have a view, which has a union. (Union is required because of the nature of the data fetched). THis view is later joined with a global temp table which holds the -say employee Id the user selects.
So at runtime there is a join with the global temp table and the view. But the performance is really bad. I have tried using various hints, like materialize, /*+ CARDINALITY(gtmp 1) */ etc.
When i query the view alone,. the performance is good. When I remove the union, the performance is good. Some how with the union- there is a full table scan on one of the joining tables.
I have the following problem. When I used in the IN-Statement fixed values e.q. 197321,197322,197323 ..., the index i_tab2_index works fine (index range scan).
But when I used in the IN-Statement an Sub-Select, the index i_tab2_index doesn't work (fast full scan)!My scale indices and used Selects:
CREATE INDEX i_tab1_index ON tab1 ( datum, flag_inst ); CREATE INDEX i_tab2_index ON tab2 ( tab2Idx, kontro ); SELECT count(epidx) as rowAnz FROM tab2 WHERE tab2Idx IN ( SELECT tab1IDX FROM tab1 WHERE datum BETWEEN '20120117' AND '20120117' AND flag_inst = '1' ) AND kontro = '9876521' [code]...
We have a person running a query and following is the explain plan
explain plan for
select distinct(extractvalue(xmltype(a.email_variables), '/CalliopeData/Attributes/HOTEL_BRAND')) as ThisBrand from hh.t_ecomm_mem_relations a where extractvalue(xmltype(a.email_variables), '/CalliopeData/Attributes/HOTEL_BRAND') not in (select b.code_brand from hh.t_pr_brand b) and a.code_corr_ecat = 'PREA' and a.status = 'S' and a.audit_time > sysdate - 1 ;
PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Plan hash value: 1904775187
mbr has 60,000 rows and member has 60,000 rows approx. two tables have indexes on ssn, and citi_no on them.
PK of mbr : mbr_id PK of member : mbr_id
other columns are not PK, and have no index on it.
I'm wondering why the statment doesn't use index while ssn and citi_no have index.
MERGE INTO mbr t USING (SELECT mbr_id,citi_no FROM member) a ON (t.ssn = a.citi_no) WHEN MATCHED THEN UPDATE SET t.asis_mbr_id = a.mbr_id where t.ssn not in(select ssn from mbr group by ssn having count(*) > 1)
I have queries on the execution plan of a sql statement
Following is the example
create table t1 as select s1.nextval id,a.* from dba_objects a; create table t2 as select s2.nextval id,a.* from dba_objects a; insert into t1 select s1.nextval id,a.* from dba_objects a; insert into t1 select s1.nextval id,a.* from dba_objects a; insert into t2 select s2.nextval id,a.* from dba_objects a; insert into t2 select s2.nextval id,a.* from dba_objects a; insert into t2 select s2.nextval id,a.* from dba_objects a; commit;
create index i1 on t1(id); create index i2 on t2(id); create index i11 on t1(object_type);
(1) First index on object_type is accessed to get rowids - t1.object_type='VIEW' (2) Then the filter on owner is applied - t1.owner='SYS' (3) Then the table T1 is accessed to fetch data from the rowids returned by the index I11 and filer application - TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID
Though I am unable to understand how filter can be applied to the rowids retrieved from index, we can see from the plan below that The rows accessed have reduced from 8550 to 1221 before we access the table...Thus filter "t1.owner='SYS'" is applied in between. Right?
another question is
Case 1 - do we retrieve a rowid from index for a given value, then retrieve required values from table for that rowid Thus row at a time in both ... in loop OR Case 2 - we first fetch all rowids from index and then retrieve values from table one row at a time from the collection of rowids fetched?
Suppose Case 1 is what is happening then can we say, both the steps mentioned by IDS 2,3 in plan below are executed exactly equal number of times and the filter "t1.owner='SYS'" is applied at some later stage? Of course in this case the values in ROWS stand misleading then
select * from t1,t2 where t1.id = t2.id and t1.object_type='VIEW' and t1.owner='SYS';
Execution Plan ---------------------------------------------------------- Plan hash value: 26873579 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Id | Operation | Name | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | 0 | SELECT STATEMENT | | 1221 | 233K| 915 (1)| 00:00:11 | |* 1 | HASH JOIN | | 1221 | 233K| 915 (1)| 00:00:11 | |* 2 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID| T1 | 1221 | 116K| 381 (1)| 00:00:05 | |* 3 | INDEX RANGE SCAN | I11 | 8550 | | 24 (0)| 00:00:01 | | 4 | TABLE ACCESS FULL | T2 | 161K| 15M| 533 (1)| 00:00:07 | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Predicate Information (identified by operation id): --------------------------------------------------- 1 - access("T1"."ID"="T2"."ID") 2 - filter("T1"."OWNER"='SYS') 3 - access("T1"."OBJECT_TYPE"='VIEW')
I'm working on a query that will show how many differents SKUs we have on-hand, how many of those SKUs have been cycle-counted, and how many we have yet to cycle-count.I've prepared a sample table and data:
What I also want to do is select another column that will group by sku.abc and count the total number of A, B, and C SKUs where the lot.qty is > 0:
SELECT sk.abc AS "STRATA", COUNT (DISTINCT sk.sku) AS "Total" FROM sku sk, (SELECT sku FROM lot WHERE qty > 0) item WHERE item.sku = sk.sku(+) GROUP BY sk.abc
Finally, I need the last column to display the DIFFERENCE between the two totals from the queries above (the difference between the "counted" and the "total"):
In my code I am using delete statement which is taking too much time to execute.
Statement is as follow:
DELETE FROM TRADE_ORDER_EMP_ALLOCATION T WHERE (ARTEMIS_SOURCE_SYSTEM_ID,NM_ARTEMIS_SOURCE_SYSTEM,CD_BOOK_KEY,ACTIVITY_DT) IN (SELECT ARTEMIS_SOURCE_SYSTEM_ID,NM_ARTEMIS_SOURCE_SYSTEM,CD_BOOK_KEY,ACTIVITY_DT FROM LOAD_TRADE_ORDER WHERE IND_IS_BAD_RECORD='N');
Every column in "IN" clause and select clause is containing index on it
Every time no of rows which to be deleted is vary (May be in hundred ,thousand or hundred thousand )so that I am Unable to use "BITMAP" index on the table "LOAD_TRADE_ORDER" column "IND_IS_BAD_RECORD" though it is containing distinct record in it.
Even table "TRADE_ORDER_EMP_ALLOCATION" is containing "RANGE" PARTITION over it on the column "ARTEMIS_SOURCE_SYSTEM_ID". With this I am enclosing table scripts with Indexes and Partitions over it.
way for fast execution in of above delete statement?
Session 1 create table tab1 as select * from dba_objects where object_id is not null; alter session set events '10046 trace name context forever, level 12'; declare x number; begin for i in 1..4 loop
[code]....
Session 2
after "starting" the above pl/sql block from Session 1, I keep on querying tab2 from Session 2 And as soon as 2 records are inserted in tab2, I create index from Session 2
select * from tab2; select * from tab2; select * from tab2; N ---------- 1 2 create index i on tab1(object_id);
As I have tested from a single session (just before this test) such index is used for the sql statement
select count(1) into x from tab1 where object_id=2331;
However when I checked the trace file I am not geeting results as expected
I am expecting 4 execution plans - 2 FTS and 2 Index Access scans and for this I am issuing following command
SELECT COUNT(1) FROM TAB1 WHERE OBJECT_ID=2331 call count cpu elapsed disk query current rows ------- ------ -------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- Parse 1 0.00 0.00 0 1 0 0 Execute 4 0.00 0.00 0 2 0 0
[code]....
1) Why I am unable to see 4 execution plans - 2 with FTS and 2 with Index access when I mentioned 'aggregate=no'?
2) Whether the index i will be used for last 2 iterations after first 2 iterations of FTS?
If answer to above question 2) is 'No'
By which method I can force an ongoing sql statement in loop to take different execution path? Of course I can't hard parse sql in 'that' current session Will flushing Shared pool work in above case?
* 35 | ID TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROW | S_ORG_EXT | 3064K| 2472M| | 1 (0)| 00:00:01 | | 36 | INDEX FULL SCAN | S_ORG_EXT_U1 | 14 | | | 1 (0)| 00:00:01 |
Predicate Information (identified by operation id): --------------------------------------------------- 35 - filter("T2"."ACCNT_FLG"<>'N' AND ("T2"."INT_ORG_FLG"<>'Y' OR "T2"."PRTNR_FLG"<>'N'))
This unselective index scan on step 36 of the explain is returning 14 rows but optimizer is selecting 3064 K rows from the table .
I tried creating combined index on all 3 columns mentioned in the predicates for 35th step , but that is not utilized .
how to index this whole expression ::--
(ACCNT_FLG<>'N' AND (INT_ORG_FLG<>'Y' OR PRTNR_FLG<>'N'))
Something like CREATE INDEX XYZ on table((ACCNT_FLG<>'N' AND (INT_ORG_FLG<>'Y' OR PRTNR_FLG<>'N')) compute statistics ;
I have column containing three values:-N,E,Y.I want to get results with only E and Y values.Is it it possible to create index which would not look for N values.
On Oracle 10g, I create, delete and drop a lot of tables. Therefore, the disk is highly fragmented.The execution of a very simple create statement takes more than a minute. If I execute the same statement but first truncate the table and insert the data, it takes less than a second!
I think this has to do with the high fragmentation of the disk. Obviously, I can defragment the disk, but I will always have a high fragmentation since I use a lot of create, delete and drops.
how I can improve the performance of create statements on highly fragmented disks?
Create small functional indexes for special cases in very large tables.
When there is a column having one values in 99% records and another values that have to be search for, it is possible to create an index using null value. Index will be small and the rebuild fast.
Example
create index vh_tst_decode_ind_if1 on vh_tst_decode_ind (decode(S,'I','I',null),style)
It is possible to do index more selective when the key is updated and there are many records to create more levels in b-tree.
create index vh_tst_decode_ind_if3 on vh_tst_decode_ind (decode(S,'I','I',null), decode(S,'I',style,null) )
To access the record can by like:
SQL> select --+ index(vh_tst_decode_ind_if3) 2 style ,count(*) 3 from vh_tst_decode_ind 4 where 5 decode(S,'I','I',null)='I' 6 group by style 7 ;
