Sat, AFAIK .. The Current and Query are Blocks and i am not sure you can equate that rows untl u know how the rows are packed. Also See the Prev post which talks abt direct inserts. Cheers Ganesh On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 13:17:45 -0800, sat0789@xxxxxxxxxxx <sat0789@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hello All, > I have a situation.... > We are running an etl process into a fact table has 15 fk's enabled (no > indexes associated) During the session's run i did a trace session and > this is the result from tkprof > > Execute 1175 23.09 23.22 10(disk) 3616(query) > 1092396(current) 56400 (rows) > > As you can see there is a huge amount of current gets for 56400 rows. > > Now i removed all the constraints and ran the session again. this is the > result.. > > Execute 3520 29.60 29.02 0 6796(query) > 14530 (current) 168960 (rows) > > The result shows very minimal current gets for a lot more rows than > previous one. > > For some reason i am under the immpression that the current gets should > at least match the number of rows inserted (or it is only for > update/delete ??) > The 2nd result disproves that.. > Please help me understand... > > Also i had seen in one of the metalink replies by the oracle tech that > > """the number of 'query' divided by the number of rows comes > out to about 9 gets/row, which is not unreasonable. The number > of 'current' divided by the number of rows is quite a bit higher > at 33 gets/row, but may not be unreasonable,"""" > > What is a resonable/unreasonale number for query get/row and current > get/row > > Thanks, > > Sat > -- > //www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l > -- //www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l