Alternate for 'IN' operator

Question

All,
version: 11g
One of my query which uses 'IN' operator in WHERE clause to filter. I used around 30 values inside the IN operator to filter. I'm facing performance issue with this, Is there any alternate to IN operator which improves the performance of the query? For some reason, I don't want to go for UNION set operator. Pls advise.
thanks
sen

Answer 1

SELECT Approvable, Approvable."Type", Approvable.UniqueName, Approvable.Name, Approvable.CreateDate, Approvable.StatusString FROM Approvable WHERE Approvable."Active" = TRUE
AND Approvable.Preparer = baseid('AAAKAECCxTV') AND
Approvable."Type" <> 'txt.common.core.SupplierProfileRequest' AND Approvable."Type" <> 'txt.receiving.core.Receipt' AND Approvable."Type" <> 'txt.receiving.core.MilestoneTracker'
AND Approvable."Type" <> 'txt.contract.core.Contract'
AND Approvable."Type" <> 'txt.invoicing.core.InvoiceReconciliation' AND Approvable."Type" <> 'txt.payment.core.Payment' AND Approvable."Type" <> 'txt.payment.core.PaymentTransaction'
AND Approvable."Type" <> 'txt.purchasing.core.PurchaseOrder'
AND Approvable."Type" <> 'txt.purchasing.core.CopyOrder' AND Approvable."Type" <> 'txt.purchasing.core.DirectOrder' AND Approvable."Type" <> 'txt.purchasing.core.ERPOrder'
AND Approvable."Type" <> 'txt.pcard.core.PCardOrder' AND Approvable."Type" <> 'txt.charge.core.ChargeReconciliation' AND Approvable."Type" <> 'txt.charge.core.Charge'
AND Approvable."Type" <> 'txt.collaboration.core.Proposal' AND Approvable."Type" <> 'txt.collaboration.core.CounterProposal' AND Approvable."Type" <> 'txt.collaboration.core.CollaborationRequest'
AND Approvable."Type" <> 'txt.expense.core.TravelAuthorizationOrder' AND Approvable."Type" <> 'txt.budget.core.Budget' ORDER BY Approvable.TimeCreated DESC*Is the above more readable than below?
SELECT approvable,
  approvable."Type",
  approvable.uniquename,
  approvable.name,
  approvable.createdate,
  approvable.statusstring
FROM approvable
WHERE approvable."Active" = true
AND approvable.preparer   = baseid('AAAKAECCxTV')
AND Approvable."Type"    != 'txt.common.core.SupplierProfileRequest'
AND Approvable."Type"    != 'txt.receiving.core.Receipt'
AND Approvable."Type"    != 'txt.receiving.core.MilestoneTracker'
AND Approvable."Type"    != 'txt.contract.core.Contract'
AND Approvable."Type"    != 'txt.invoicing.core.InvoiceReconciliation'
AND Approvable."Type"    != 'txt.payment.core.Payment'
AND Approvable."Type"    != 'txt.payment.core.PaymentTransaction'
AND Approvable."Type"    != 'txt.purchasing.core.PurchaseOrder'
AND Approvable."Type"    != 'txt.purchasing.core.CopyOrder'
AND Approvable."Type"    != 'txt.purchasing.core.DirectOrder'
AND Approvable."Type"    != 'txt.purchasing.core.ERPOrder'
AND Approvable."Type"    != 'txt.pcard.core.PCardOrder'
AND Approvable."Type"    != 'txt.charge.core.ChargeReconciliation'
AND Approvable."Type"    != 'txt.charge.core.Charge'
AND Approvable."Type"    != 'txt.collaboration.core.Proposal'
AND Approvable."Type"    != 'txt.collaboration.core.CounterProposal'
AND Approvable."Type"    != 'txt.collaboration.core.CollaborationRequest'
AND Approvable."Type"    != 'txt.expense.core.TravelAuthorizationOrder'
AND Approvable."Type"    != 'txt.budget.core.Budget'
ORDER BY Approvable.TimeCreated DESCIf only, you could maintain a Master/Reference table, that stores the "Approvable.TYPE" values that are valid, the entire query can be reduced to below:
SELECT approvable,
  approvable."Type",
  approvable.uniquename,
  approvable.name,
  approvable.createdate,
  approvable.statusstring
FROM approvable
WHERE approvable."Active" = true
and approvable.preparer   = baseid('AAAKAECCxTV')
and not exists (
                select 'x'
                  from reference_type_table r
                 where r.type = approvable.type
ORDER BY Approvable.TimeCreated DESCAnd nowhere have you used an IN operator, which contradicts with your subject line. So, unless you want to confuse others, the subject line must depict the picture of your problem.
As you may have noticed, the Forum software replaced Not Equals sign with a Blank, you must use != as the Not Equality operator.
Moreover, what you write in IN List, oracle converts it to OR-ed conditions. See below:
explain plan for
select * from dual where trunc(sysdate) in (to_date('07-Jan-2012', 'DD-Mon-YYYY'), to_date('08-Jan-2012', 'DD-Mon-YYYY'));
Plan hash value: 1224005312
| Id  | Operation          | Name | Rows  | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT   |      |     1 |     2 |     2   (0)| 00:00:01 |
|*  1 |  FILTER            |      |       |       |            |          |
|   2 |   TABLE ACCESS FULL| DUAL |     1 |     2 |     2   (0)| 00:00:01 |
Query Block Name / Object Alias (identified by operation id):
   1 - SEL$1
   2 - SEL$1 / DUAL@SEL$1
Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
   1 - filter(TRUNC(SYSDATE@!)=TO_DATE(' 2012-01-07 00:00:00',
              'syyyy-mm-dd hh24:mi:ss') OR TRUNC(SYSDATE@!)=TO_DATE(' 2012-01-08
              00:00:00', 'syyyy-mm-dd hh24:mi:ss'))
Column Projection Information (identified by operation id):
   1 - "DUAL"."DUMMY"[VARCHAR2,1]
   2 - "DUAL"."DUMMY"[VARCHAR2,1]Hence, I do not believe that changing to or from IN operator will benefit the performance, unless you are writing the query that makes better use of Indexes. If you have performance issues with your query, then I would suggest you to read {message:id=3292438} and provide proper information.
Edited by: Purvesh K on Jan 7, 2013 6:07 PM
Added Explain Plan