Not that it directly answers your question, but I see that the method = differs: you have ANALYZE collecting histograms with 254 buckets on = indexed columns (and I believe implicitly on every other column with 1 = bucket), while DBMS_STATS is generating 254-bucket histos on all = columns. There are other differences internal to ANALYZE and DBMS_STATs, but this = one jumped out at me. My $.02, Rich Rich Jesse System/Database Administrator rjesse@xxxxxxxxxxxx Quad/Tech Inc, Sussex, WI USA -----Original Message----- Sent: Friday, June 25, 2004 11:37 AM Subject: analyze vs dbms_stats I'm trying to get our shop to convert from analyze to dbms_stats. I'm running into some "strange" results though and wanted to see if I'm missing something or you have some advice. analyze command: ESTIMATE STATISTICS SAMPLE 30 PERCENT FOR TABLE FOR ALL INDEXES FOR ALL INDEXED COLUMNS SIZE 254 dbms_stats code I'm running: exec DBMS_STATS.GATHER_TABLE_STATS ( - ownname =3D> 'STATION_TEST', - tabname =3D> 'MEMBERS', - partname =3D> NULL, - estimate_percent =3D> 30, - block_sample =3D> FALSE, - method_opt =3D> 'FOR ALL COLUMNS SIZE 254', - degree =3D> 0, - granularity =3D> 'DEFAULT', - cascade =3D> TRUE, - stattab =3D> NULL, - statid =3D> NULL, - statown =3D> NULL, - no_invalidate =3D> FALSE); ---------------------------------------------------------------- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com ---------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe send email to: oracle-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx put 'unsubscribe' in the subject line. -- Archives are at //www.freelists.org/archives/oracle-l/ FAQ is at //www.freelists.org/help/fom-serve/cache/1.html -----------------------------------------------------------------