Fwd: Re: SQL tuning tip

From: Tim Gorman <tim@xxxxxxxxx>
To: mohamed.houri@xxxxxxxxx
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 03:14:52 -0600
Mohamed,

My sincere apologies, you were a respondent yourself, I had mistaken you as the
original poster.  My sincere apologies for the reproof, no matter how
gently intended;  I can only plead lingering jetlag as an excuse.

Thanks!

-Tim


On 10/18/2012 2:28 AM, Tim Gorman wrote:
> Mohamed,
>
> A gentle observation...
>
> You have asked for help in this forum.  Respondents (who cared enough
> to respond promptly rather than just deleting your message) have
> requested more information in order to help you.  Yet in your next
> response you choose to argue and to not provide the information?
>
> Please be assured that this list best helps those who help
> themselves.  Think about it.
>
> Good luck,
>
> -Tim
>
>
> On 10/17/2012 9:08 AM, mohamed houri wrote:
>> It is always good to post the oracle version information. But I am still
>> unable to figure out how the absence of this information could halve the
>> answer given by a real execution plan of a very simple query taking 300
>> seconds to complete. There are of course changes in the CBO from
>> version to
>> version that could explain why a CBO did choose a path here and not
>> there.
>> But, when confronted to a localized performance problem (a query for
>> example) I am inclined to start by getting its execution plan first. If
>> this reveals itself of no help then I will trace this query with the
>> 10046
>> events to see what is happening behind the scene (SQL recursive
>> calls, VPD
>> policy,etc...)
>> Best regards
>> Mohamed Houri
>> www.hourim.wordpress.com

--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Fwd: Re: SQL tuning tip

Other related posts:
