Re: Drilling down on the data
- From: "Mark J. Bobak" <mark@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: sanjay.khangarot@xxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 01:26:37 -0500
Hi Sanjay,
First, it works a lot better if you initiate a new thread (by sending
mail to oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx) rather than to respond to an existing
thread that has nothing to do with your question. At least you changed
the subject, so people won't be too confused.
(Especially those w/ threading mail programs.)
Anyhow, enough about that.
As to your design....well, I'm afraid it's in bad shape. That is, if I
understand what it is you want to do. You mention a table,
PRODUCT_BATCH, with BATCH_NO, PARENT_BATCH, ATTR1, and
ATTR2. Then you have three observation tables, OBERVATION1,
OBSERVATION2, and OBSERVATION3. Each of them has a column
BATCH. Is this the same as BATCH_NO in PRODUCT_BATCH? I'm
assuming it is. The other columns in the observation tables,
are they all labeled correctly? Specifically, should OBSERVATION2
and OBSERVATION3 both have columns OBS3 and OBS4?
Finally, you talk about "tests performed on a batch", but
I see no reference to anything called "test" in the sample data
you show.
So, I'm a little confused as to your data model and what you're
really trying to accomplish here.
However, assuming that the observation tables contain the
output of the "test", and there's no way to determine
what batch is in what table, here are a couple of possibilities
I see right off:
1.) Union together the results of querying each of the observation
tables. That way, you'll find the row you're looking for, regardless
of which table it's in.
2.) Seriously reconsider your design.
a.) Why are there multiple observation tables? One
ought to be enough, even for fairly high concurrency,
if you consider FREELISTS, INITRANS, and how many
rows you'll have per block.
b.) You could partition the table, each operation type could
go into it's own partition.
Deciding whch of 2a or 2b to go with is going to depend on
your appliacation, and how it works.
I don't recommend 1, except as a stop gap measure, because
it's not a very nice design.....
I hope that helps. If you still have more questions or concerns,
please provide a test case. (Working table creates, small set of
test data, and what the sqmple query output you're trying to
achieve should look like.)
-Mark
On Thu, 2004-12-30 at 00:50, sanjay.khangarot@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We have one table which contains the information about the batches and the
> heirarchy of the batches.
> On these batches certain operation are performed and as there are no similary
> in the operations, every operation results are stored in a table, so if we
> have 9 operations then these 9 operations goes in 9 tables.
> The table structures are as follows:
> Product_batch ( table)
> Batch_no Parent_batch Attri1
> Attri2
> 1 Null Xyx
> abc
> 2 1 aaaa
> saaa
> 3 2 aaaa
> 344
>
> Observation1(Table)
> Batch obs1 obs2
> 1 123 124
>
> Observation2 (table)
> batch obs3 obs4
> 2 345 456
>
> Observation3
> batch obs3 obs4
> 3 result result
>
>
> Now to come to know about the tests performed on a batch and it`s parents how
> can we proceed?
> As from the batch I can`t come to know about the table in which the results
> are lying...(can be 1,2 or 3)
> eg. If I wanted to know the results of batch 3 and it`s parents(2 and 1) how
> can I go to the table 3 to pick the observation, then for it`s parent which
> is 2 go to obseravation2 and get the results and so on and then finally give
> the
> result...
>
>
> Does anyone have came across with this kind of problem?
>
> TIA
>
> Regards
>
> Sanjay
>
--
Mark J. Bobak
mark@xxxxxxxxx
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts." --Richard P.
Feynman
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Other related posts:
