RE: Materialized Views 9i vs 10g
- From: Chuck Boddy <Chuck.Boddy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: Andrew Kerber <andrew.kerber@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2010 09:19:25 -0700
Hi Andrew,
That could be it. That would make sense. I'm the developer(and implementer)
of the Materialized Views. I will pass this on to the DBA's and see what the
answer is.
Thank you very much,
Chuck
From: Andrew Kerber [mailto:andrew.kerber@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 8:54 AM
To: Chuck Boddy
Cc: oracle-l
Subject: Re: Materialized Views 9i vs 10g
Did you re-gather stats on the underlying tables when you went to 10g?
On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 10:47 AM, Chuck Boddy
<Chuck.Boddy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:Chuck.Boddy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
Hi,
I am taking Materialized Views that were initially built on a 9i database and
rebuilding them on a 10g database - verbatim. I am noticing that the
performance is noticeably degraded. Checked out the Explain Plan on 9i vs 10g
for some the materialized views, and they would indicate that on 10g, the
materialized views should at least perform the same OR performance should be
approved. Any ideas would be appreciated.
Thanks,
Chuck
--
Andrew W. Kerber
'If at first you dont succeed, dont take up skydiving.'
Other related posts:
