In this case it wouldn't matter since they still would have the value from the previous run which is identical in value since I am testing for the same period of time. I just set them each time incase the volume changes in the future. I got into this habit after having a GTT that normally contained 100-500 or so records at time, but one day we had to processes 300k records so the nested loop plan was not good to say the least. I just check the dba_tables view and the GTT's are getting updated via the scheduler. It is just odd why the v$sql_plan showed hashjoin and internally was doing a nl plan. Thanks, Ken -----Original Message----- From: oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Wolfgang Breitling Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2006 5:48 PM To: kennaim@xxxxxxxxx Cc: 'Jonathan Lewis'; oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: RE: Subject: RE: Tuning issue, 10046 trace and Scheduled Jobs Is it possible that setting the statistics for the GTT tables fails when run as a scheduled job. If the optimizer assumes that the GTTs are empty that could explain that it goes for an NL join. I have seen that happening a lot in the Peoplesoft environment with its "temporary" tables ( not GTTs but real tables which usually are empty, especially when the weekly stats job runs :-( ) At 03:33 PM 11/21/2006, Ken Naim wrote: >I apologize, I changed the scenario on you to narrow the scope of the issue >down, I took out the third table and just did a full outer join of two of >the tables and got the same poor execution, just it took 15 minutes (instead >of 35) now for the two tables. > >I am not sure if the oracle scheduler would is changing the session >parameters, how can I check? > >Based on what you were saying about the nested loops I looked back at some >code I wrote a while back that this code was loosely based on and compared >them and found that my old code had GTT's with primary keys and my new ones >didn't so I added them and the code now runs with a an index read instead of >a full scan under the filter section which now runs in the normal 10 >seconds. > >It is just so odd that the scheduler caused it to do nested loops instead of >a full scan and the explain plan didn't even show it. > >I appreciate your effort not only in helping me resolve this issue, but in >educating me how to handle these issues in the future. Regards Wolfgang Breitling Centrex Consulting Corporation www.centrexcc.com ______________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email ______________________________________________________________________ -- //www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l -- //www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l