Re: Optimization of Partitioned Outer Joins

  • From: "jaromir nemec" <jaromir@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2005 22:37:51 +0100


> but the original times table is
> the preserved table in the outer join, so for a
> nested loop it would be the outer table.

The preserved table is equal the outer table for SM outer join and for hash
outer join as well, isn't  it?
I'm little bit confused from the formulation above, based on the nested loop

By the way, what is the correct definition of an outer table in an (inner)
hash join? (There is no preserved table to be used in the definition; in
case that ORDERED hint isn't used, it is not obvious what table is hashed
and what table is probed).

The definition of "outer table"  is particularly important e.g. for the hint
Can anybody clarify it for me?



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jonathan Lewis" <jonathan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, January 02, 2005 4:51 PM
Subject: Re: Optimization of Partitioned Outer Joins


Other related posts: