Re: Sincere Advice on Sql Plan - Thanks
- From: Ganesh Raja <ganesh.raja@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: Stephane Faroult <sfaroult@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 22:27:10 +0100
The ANSI Query runs for 20 Secs to get 20 Rows !!!! - The users are
shouting Unacceptable !!! (i will do the same) .. If somebody can make
sense of this . It will be real useful.
Cheers
Ganesh
On Wed, 13 Oct 2004 23:16:30 +0200, Stephane Faroult
<sfaroult@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> (Sorry, had to remove the execution plans to avoid overquoting) That's an
> interesting one, and very illustrative of what I dislike in the ANSI syntax.
> In the old syntax, all tables in the FROM clause are (roughly) equal. With
> the ANSI syntax, you SELECT from *one* table, which is joined to others -
> primum inter pares (in plain English, more equal than the others). You
> totally lose the symmetry. The ANSI syntax takes it (pretty obviously) as
> the driving table - not the Oracle syntax. I guess that finding the proper
> driving table with the ANSI syntax musn't be a piece of cake for the
> optimizer, because you put it, from the very start, on some rails. If the
> wrong table was specified in the FROM clause, tough luck.
>
> Stephane Faroult
>
>
>
> Ganesh Raja wrote:
> Lex,
Not sure If Oracle-L Accepts Attachments ..
Here are the Queries and
> the Plan.
Thanks for the help.
Rgds,
Ganesh
On Wed, 13 Oct 2004 19:58:55
> +0200, Lex de Haan
<lex.de.haan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> you might want to provide the two statements you are talking about?
and
> maybe even the two corresponding execution plans?
Kind
> regards,
Lex.
-------------------------------
visit
> http://www.naturaljoin.nl
-------------------------------
skype me
> <callto://lexdehaan>
-----Original Message-----
From:
> oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On
> Behalf Of Ganesh Raja
Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2004 18:54
To:
> jkstill@xxxxxxxxx
Cc: smishra_97@xxxxxxxxx; oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject:
> Re: Sincere Advice on Sql Plan - Thanks
Okay I am Going to Piggy Back on
> this ..
I have an ANSI SQL which when Rewriiten Using Oracle Syntax it
> seems
to take a Better plan to execute it .. Any ideas why this
> is
happening.
There is a Total Change in the plan and it works much faster
> than the
ANSI Counterpart
Any help is appreciated.
Thanks.
Cheers
Ganesh
> R
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
>
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Other related posts:
