RE: Different Plans for Literal Vs Bind Variables

The phrase "would not have been" indicates an assumption to me and you know 
what happens when we assume :-)  I would leave nothing to chance and check 
v$sql for the specific hash_value that appears in your raw 10046 trace file to 
be 100% positive that the query is not loaded in your library cache before you 
run it with the desired bind variable value.  Then, if you verify that it gets 
hard parsed with the desired bind value and still doesn't get the same plan as 
the literal, I think your next step is to run two 10053 traces and diff them.  
In case you're not familiar with the 10053 trace, here's a good place to start:

http://www.centrexcc.com/A%20Look%20under%20the%20Hood%20of%20CBO%20-%20the%2010053%20Event.pdf

Regards,
Brandon

-----Original Message-----
From: oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Ian MacGregor

The statements were new so they
would not have been in the library cache, and the values reported for the
10046 level 12 trace matched those in the query with literals


Privileged/Confidential Information may be contained in this message or 
attachments hereto. Please advise immediately if you or your employer do not 
consent to Internet email for messages of this kind. Opinions, conclusions and 
other information in this message that do not relate to the official business 
of this company shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by it.
--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l

Other related posts: