Excel rules optimization

Hello.
I'm new on OPA (one week at the moment) and have to translate financing rules to OPA rules.
I thought using excel rules that will give us the result of the calculation , after having choose witch rule to use depending of some entry datas.
We will use the determination-batch engine (with csv input / output) , just because there will be millions of lines to treat.
I just wonder, as I'm a newby of the subject, if there are some rules to use creating my excel decision tables, to optimize the calculation for the determination engine.
Thanks for all help you could give to me,
Philippe,

Hello Jasmine and thanks for your answer.
The point is I'm not asking how to write OPA Excel rules, but how to write them, the way the calculation will be optimised (I mean, the faster it could be).
But, as I read your document (very well done) it gives to me some rules of "Well-writing" rules, but not to optimise the calculation of the rules.
Philippe,

Similar Messages

How to use Entity Attributes in excel Rule File

Hello,
I have defined two entities Entity A with two attributes and Entity B child of A with two attributes.
I needed to have many instances of theses objects thats why i have chosen entities.
I need to calculate for each entity a result depending on the values of the attributes filled by the user.
My final goal is to have the sum of these calculated results.
The issue i am facing is whenever i try to define a rule in Excel, OPM considers the attribute as global (and creates it) and not as entity level. I therefore have duplicate error.
How can i tell Excel/OPM that the attribute is entity level ?
Thank you.

Make sure you are using exactly the same attribute text in Excel and in your properties file. You can also use the legend key to map from the attribute text to a shorter form.
There isn't any magic here! If the text is the same it will match.
If you provide the actual text of the attributes and entities you are using, we might notice something else.
Davin.

Business rule optimization

Hi all,
I have the following business rule:
FIX([TargetYr],[TargetVersion],"0000",@LDESCENDANTS([AllocAccount],0))
FIX([SourceMonth])
[TargetScenario] = ([SourceYr]->[SourceScenario]->[SourceVersion]->"0000")/([SourceYr]->[SourceScenario]->[SourceVersion]->"0000"->[AllocAccount]) * [AllocAccount];
ENDFIX;
FIX(@LIST([EndMonth]:[SourceMonth]))
[TargetScenario] = ([SourceMonth]->[TargetScenario])/([SourceMonth]->[SourceYr]->[SourceScenario]->[SourceVersion]->"0000") * ([SourceYr]->[SourceScenario]->[SourceVersion]->"0000");
ENDFIX;
ENDFIX;
It's a two-part script used for forecasting balance sheet accounts from a top-down perspective. The first part takes a balance in (say) June for a parent account, then allocates that amount down through its children accounts in June. The second part then takes the June balances for all the level 0 accounts and allocates them backwards through each month based on a source set of data, so that you how have a full year's worth of forecasted balances.
My questions are twofold:
1) Is there a way to change this rule so that I can enter a number of parent accounts in AllocAccount instead of just one at a time? Right now it only works if one parent is entered.
2) Is there a way to optimize this? It seems to take forever to run. I'm new to this so I doubt I'm doing this most efficiently.
Thanks for your time!

1) Is there a way to change this rule so that I can enter a number of parent accounts in AllocAccount instead of just one at a time? Right now it only works if one parent is entered.There's no reason you can't have multiple @LDESCENDANTS in your FIX. May I suggest that you tag these upper level members with a UDA and then FIX on those? Something like a @LDESCENDANTS(@UDA("Account", "ToBeAlloced")) should do it. You will need to maintain the outline with these hierarchies but that is likely (?) less painful than doing it in code.
2) Is there a way to optimize this? It seems to take forever to run. I'm new to this so I doubt I'm doing this most efficiently.Can you do this at level zero for your other dimensions/specific Scenarios and then agg up the results? If you have other dimensions, you are doing this allocation for all levels -- you can probably get away with level 0 of those other dims.
Regards,
Cameron Lackpour

Excel rule files not opening in OPA 10.2

Hi ,
I have been using OPA 10.2 , on a windows 7 system , any of the excel files in my OPA project are not opening. They give an error message - "An error occurred while opening the document abc.xls. Unable to set the installed property of the AddIn class."
I un-installed and re-installed OPA as well as Office 2007 Enterprise Edition , but the error still exists. I also tried running OPA with - "Run as administrator" option , but the problem persists.
Can anybody please help in this regard.
Thanks,
Kavyashree

Take a look at the Installation Guide for Oracle Policy Modeling 10.3.1. There is a topic at the bottom that has some steps that might be relevant for your situation. For convenience I've copied some of the details:
The following is a possible workaround that will enable you to manually activate the Oracle Policy
Modeling AddIn for Excel:
1) Open the Excel document outside Oracle Policy Modeling.
2) Select Excel Options from the Office Menu (circle at top left). Select Add-Ins, then find
Manage: Excel Add-Ins, and click on Go...
3) Place a tick in the Oracle Policy Modeling Excel 2007 check box (if it is already ticked, try unticking,
clicking OK, and ticking it again).
4) Click on the OK button.
5) Try opening the workbook again in Oracle Policy Modeling.
If the Oracle Policy Modeling AddIn for Excel does not appear in step 3, you should be able to locate
it in the templates directory of the Oracle Policy Modeling installation. The default location is:
C:\Program Files\Oracle\Policy Modeling\templates\Oracle Policy Modeling Excel 2007.xlam

Rule base optimizer in 9i and 10g

Hi
All,
I just upgraded databses from oracle 9.2.0.6 to 10.2.0.3.
I think as i know oracle 10g no more support rule based optimzer ( correct me if i am wrong)
but some of the script have rule optimizer hint over there. If i keep as it is will it give me error or I need to change something.
Thanks,
Vishal

what should i do? should i keep as it is?
RBO is obsoleted in 10g , but hint RULE still work i.e it will not error out.
Check execution plan with and without hint , if execution plan look better without hint,
go for it. Keeping as it is , will not harm , but data increase/change drastically in underlying table of query , in that case CBO might give you better execution plan then with rule hint.

Mac Pro (2013) with Mavericks and Mac Office Excel

Using MAC Excel VBA, and obviously with my personally written Excel VBA application, I have discovered that
in a multi-Workbook Excel app, I am unable to "Open" additional Workbooks (xlsm-type) successfully
from any Workbook OTHER THAN with the very first Workbook opened in the app. In other words, if my app needs
2 or more Workbooks opened at any one time, only the 1st Workbook opened can "open" any other workbooks
successfully.
If the 2nd or any other Workbook in my app tries to execute an "open workbook" procedure of its own, no Err is thrown
and no indication is given that its "open Workbook" statement did not work, but the program/routine just continues as if
nothing was wrong. Additionally, all statements pertaining to the "not-opened" Workbook don't do a thing also
(i.e., .Clear, .ClearContents, .Range, .Copy, etc. don't work and don't throw errors).
On the other hand, when I restructure my Excel application such that the very first opened Workbook also "opens"
all the other Workbooks needed in my entire application, then my Excel application works great, even when I call
other subroutines that don't include "open workbook" statements but do include opject references and database
statements for whichever already-opened Workbook it needs. In this case also, all the final "close workbook"
statements must be properly placed in the first workbook's code and eventually executed at the end, and the entire
app works appropriately and successfully.
My question is, is it an Excel rule that ONLY the first workbook opened is allowed to open additional Workbooks, or
is this a MAC Excel limitation only, or is there a MAC Excel or VBA setting that solves this situation? I have done VBA
debug tracing in my app code to "prove" my point over and over here, and have found nothing that solves my delimma.
Maybe there's an additional workbook "open" parameter that might help, but I haven't discovered it yet. Note that
I am openinfg all my Workbooks with ReadOnly:= false
Note: I am using a Mac Pro (2013) 6-core, Mavericks, and Excel 11 VBA. Everything else on my entire system works great.
Thank you for any suggestions. I have used Windows Excel for many years very successfully and don't recall ever
encountering this situation with Workbooks before.

18. Can I connect a Mini DisplayPort monitor or monitor using a Mini DisplayPort adapter to a Thunderbolt port on my Thunderbolt-equipped Mac?
Yes. A Mini DisplayPort display or a display connecting with a Mini DisplayPort to VGA, DVI, or HDMI adapter will work just like it was connecting to a Mini DisplayPort connector when plugging in directly to the Thunderbolt connector on your Apple computer. Click here for more information on Mini DisplayPort connections and adapters.
19. How do I connect my Mini DisplayPort monitor or monitor using a Mini DisplayPort adapter to my Thunderbolt-equipped Mac when I have other Thunderbolt devices connected?
When connecting a Mini DisplayPort display or a display using a Mini DisplayPort adapter to a Thunderbolt peripheral (except as described in question 14), make sure the display is connected at the end of the Thunderbolt chain. You can use only one Mini DisplayPort device in the Thunderbolt chain.
Note: Systems with more than one Thunderbolt port, like an iMac, can have more than one Mini DisplayPort monitor or monitor connected with a Mini DisplayPort adapter connected as each Thunderbolt port can support one Mini DisplayPort display.

Use of Excel numerical functions

Hello,
Is it possible in a Excel rule file to use excel functions?
For example, I would like to use the following function : Ceiling(<My attribute of type number>,1).
I've seen that in a Word file, it is possible to use something like : <the result> = Round(<the value>,3)
It seems that OPM does not detect excel functions. Can you help me?
Thanks.
Celine

Brad is 100% right that the Excel functions can NOT be executed at runtime. Also, OPA does NOT pick up Excel functions at compile time at covert them into the OPA rule format. But there was a discussion and a prototype to do this years ago, but it was never developed. I like the idea that you could throw together an Excel sheet with some formulas for OPA to capture and include in your rulebase. Anyone else agree?

Rule based Optimiser in 10g

Can anyone tell me if there is still a rule based optimiser in 10g, i have heard that it has been removed? Is this correct?

Here's what's in the Database Performance Tuning Guide 10g Release 1:
Rule-based Optimization (RBO) Obsolescence
RBO as a functionality is no longer supported. RBO still exists in Oracle 10g Release 1, but is an unsupported feature. No code changes have been made to RBO and no bug fixes are provided. Oracle supports only the query optimizer, and all applications running on Oracle Database 10g Release 1 (10.1) should use that optimizer. Please review the following Oracle Metalink desupport notice (189702.1) for RBO:
http://metalink.oracle.com/metalink/plsql/ml2_documents.showDocument?p_
database_id=NOT&p_id=189702.1
You can also access desupport notice 189702.1 and related notices by searching for "desupport of RBO" at:
http://metalink.oracle.com
Notice 189702.1 provides details about the desupport of RBO and the migration of applications based on RBO to query optimization.
Some consequences of the desupport of RBO are:
CHOOSE and RULE are no longer supported as OPTIMIZER_MODE initialization parameter values and a warning is displayed in the alert log if the value is set to RULE or CHOOSE. The functionalities of those parameter values still exist but will be removed in a future release. See "OPTIMIZER_MODE Initialization Parameter" for information optimizer mode parameters.
ALL_ROWS is the default value for the OPTIMIZER_MODE initialization parameter.
The CHOOSE and RULE optimizer hints are no longer supported. The functionalities of those hints still exist but will be removed in a future release.
Existing applications that previously relied on rule-based optimization (RBO) need to be moved to query optimization.
HTH

About optimizer mode

Hi,
How to change the optimizer mode from ALL_ROWS
Thanks

Whether we do not know the OP's Oracle version, we can assume it is not 8i or 9i. Do you realize the link you provided is very old. Still speaking about RULE optimizer, "analyze table" command (both becoming obsolete then depracted) without telling anything about more modern database such as 10g+. Moreover there're some rule of thumbs which can mislead query tuning.
Much better to refer to the Oracle document that Pierre linked to in first place.
And why not ask to the OP, why he/she wants to modify the optimizer from ALL_ROWS to what value with what expected results, based on what analyzes...
Nicolas.

Discoverer Optimizer

One of our application uses rule based optimizer at db level and by default discoverer uses cost based optimizer. We do a lot of ad-hoc reporting in this area. Does changing the optimizer at discoverer will help us in performance?

and one more ...
==================================================================
Subject:Which Optimizer Is Being Used In Discoverer? : Cost or Rule
     Doc ID:      Note:1055786.6      Type:      PROBLEM
     Last Revision Date:      26-NOV-2002      Status:      PUBLISHED
PROBLEM DESCRIPTION:
====================
Does Discoverer use the cost-based or rule-based optimizer?
SOLUTION DESCRIPTION:
=====================
There have been a number of questions recently about how the optimizer
chooses execution paths based on the presence of hints, statistics and the
optimizer_mode init.ora parameter. The rules are described in detail in
Chapter 8 of the Oracle 8 Tuning Guide.
There have also been questions about the Discoverer registry entry
"UseOptimizerHints".
If you do not need the details, for best results:
* leave "UseOptimizerHints" to its default value of 0,
* ensure the init.ora parameter optimizer_mode is set to CHOOSE,
* analyze the application tables, using ANALYZE TABLE command.
Which optimizer will be used:
The optimizer used will be the COST optimizer if there is a valid optimizer
hint in the SQL statement that Discoverer generates, regardless of all other
factors. Check the SQL inspector to look at the SQL generated. The kernel
parses SQL comments to determine if the comment is really a hint, and if so,
will ALWAYS, UNDER ALL CIRCUMSTANCES use the cost optimizer, even if there
are no statistics, and even if the init.ora parameters are set to use the
rule optimizer by default. Only if there is no optimizer hint in the SQL
statement, the following table shows what happens:
Optimizer Mode     Got           Optimizer used
parameter     Statistics?
CHOOSE          Y          Cost
CHOOSE          N          Rule
RULE          Y          Rule
RULE          N          Rule
ALL_ROWS     Y          Cost
ALL_ROWS     N          Cost (stats are estimated based on table
storage info)
FIRST_ROWS     Y          Cost
FIRST_ROWS     N          Cost (stats are estimated based on table
storage info)
In general, it makes sense to set the optimizer to CHOOSE, when the
presence of statistics (generated from the analyze table command) will
determine which optimizer is best. In Discoverer, we will not get Query
Performance prediction unless the COST optimizer is used, since the QPP
algorithm depends on getting an estimated cost for the query.
How do I get an optimizer hint in the query?
First, only consider this if you are familiar with Oracle tuning. You
don't need this for query prediction; you only do this if you want to
force a particular access path method on the optimizer. Set the hint in
the folder properties dialog. See the Oracle 8 Tuning Guide for details
of syntax.
NOTE: Any correct hint will force use of the cost optimizer under
ALL circumstances, even if the tables are not analyzed.
What does the registry entry "UseOptimizerHints" do?
The default value is 0 and it should not be changed. The registry entry
is only there to allow compatibility with Discoverer 3.0.7 which always
generated an optimizer hint (+All ROWS or +FIRST ROWS) in the SQL. If
you set "UseOptimizerHints = 1, it will revert to this behavior. The
effect of this is that the cost optimizer will be used under ALL
circumstances (see above). If your tables have not been analyzed, this
can result in poor query performance. UseOptimizerHints should always be
set to 0. If the tables are analyzed, you will use the cost optimizer,
and if they are not you will use the rule based optimizer.
What is the effect on Query Prediction?
Query prediction depends on Discoverer getting a cost for the query from
the cost optimizer. If you follow the guidelines above, and the tables are
analyzed, you will get query prediction, without having to worry about
optimizer hints. If the rule optimizer is used, due to one of the factors
above, you will not get query prediction. Setting "UseOptimizerHints = 1"
forces use of the cost optimizer, and you WILL then get query prediction,
but, unless the tables are analyzed you will get poor accuracy and poor
query performance, since the cost optimizer will not have the information
it needs to determine the best access path. And, of course, if the tables
ARE analyzed, and your optimizer_mode is set to CHOOSE, as recommended, you
will get query prediction and good performance, so you don't need the
UseOptimizerHints setting.
NOTE: To get query prediction, you need to ensure the steps outlined
in the release notes are also followed.
The behavior of the OPTIMIZER_MODE parameter is the same in Oracle7 and
OraCLE8, so this solution is correct for both.
REFERENCES:
===========
Discoverer Release Notes (as of 3.0.8)
Oracle Server Tuning Guide, Release 8.0.x

Using "and" "or" etc conjunctions

Hi All,
I have a rulebase:
1) the branch code is required if
the window = "London"
and
the product ="CDS"
2) the branch code is required if
the window = "Canada"
and
the product ="CAIN"
Since the conclusion is same for both scenarios, i am not able to write it this way.
I am trying to merge these to under single conclusion but i am not getting the proper conjunction to be used.
How can i achieve these two set of conditions in a rulebase under single conclusion.
Thanks.

This may also be something which works well as an Excel rule table, e.g.
| the window | the product | the branch code is required |
| London     | CDS         | TRUE                        |
| Canada     | CAIN        | TRUE                        |
             |        else | FALSE                       |
             ---------------------------------------------Have a look at this OPM Help topic "Define decision tables in Excel workbooks" for information about Excel rules.

Query is so slow even if i didn't use the clause "contains"

There are two table
part (id number,partnum varchar2(70),description(1024),manu_id number)
manu(id number,name varchar2(100))
i created multi-column index on part.description,which combine the column "partnum".
when there were 20,000,000 records in part table and 2,000 records in manu table, i did the following query
"select partnum,name from part a,manu b where b.id=a.manu_id and a.id=987", queried so slowly.
But when i droped this index, the qeury became very fast.
Could anybody tell me how to avoid this?
Thanks

You'd have been better off posting this in the SQL forum, since it has nothing to do with Text. Anyway... the deal is, what's probably happening is the index is being used, and it is not the fastest way to execute the query. There's nothing that says using an index is faster than not. So, the way to be sure is to look at the explain plans of the 2 queries.
If you are not in RULE optimizer mode, then collecting statistics on those tables and the index would, I would guess, inform the CBO that the index should not be used.
Can you post the explain plans for this query in each of the 2 cases?
Tom Best

Dun understand why query took so long

Hi ,
I am running the following procedure:
INSERT INTO local_table SELECT a.RECTYPE, a.lotid, a.STEP_BEGIN_TIME, a.PRODUCTION_AREA, a.COMPLETION_CLASS, a.LOT_TYPE, a.LOT_PRIORITY, a.curr_mask_Count
FROM TEMP_ACTIVE_LOTID b , lotrun a
WHERE b.lotid = a.lotid ;
and i got the error :
ORA-04030: out of process memory when trying to allocate 16504 bytes (pga heap,ksm stack)
ORA-06512: at "NEUROMART.CAL_ACTIVELOT_ML_BY_RATIO_PROC", line 26
ORA-06512: at line 1
and it took a long time to finish execution so i TKPROFED the SQL statement
here's my explain plan :
SELECT STATEMENT, GOAL = RULE          Optimizer=RULE
NESTED LOOPS
TABLE ACCESS FULL               Optimizer=ANALYZED     Object name=LOTRUN
INDEX UNIQUE SCAN               Optimizer=ANALYZED     Object name=LOTRUN_ACTIVE_LOT_PK
here's my TKPROF of the sql statement
SELECT a.RECTYPE, a.lotid, a.STEP_BEGIN_TIME, a.PRODUCTION_AREA, a.COMPLETION_CLASS, a.LOT_TYPE, a.LOT_PRIORITY, a.curr_mask_Count
FROM TEMP_ACTIVE_LOTID b , lotrun a
WHERE b.lotid = a.lotid
call count cpu elapsed disk query current rows
Parse 1 0.00 0.01 0 0 0 0
Execute 2 0.00 0.06 0 0 0 0
Fetch 2384 251.60 930.94 1550541 44434119 107 238400
total 2387 251.60 931.01 1550541 44434119 107 238400
Misses in library cache during parse: 1
Misses in library cache during parse: 1
Optimizer goal: RULE
Parsing user id: 18
OVERALL TOTALS FOR ALL NON-RECURSIVE STATEMENTS
call count cpu elapsed disk query current rows
Parse 4 0.00 0.01 0 0 0 0
Execute 5 0.00 0.06 0 0 0 2
Fetch 2385 251.60 930.94 1550541 44434120 111 238401
total 2394 251.60 931.01 1550541 44434120 111 238403
Misses in library cache during parse: 1
OVERALL TOTALS FOR ALL RECURSIVE STATEMENTS
OVERALL TOTALS FOR ALL RECURSIVE STATEMENTS
call count cpu elapsed disk query current rows
Parse 0 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0
Execute 0 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0
Fetch 0 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0
total 0 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0
Misses in library cache during parse: 0
4 user SQL statements in session.
0 internal SQL statements in session.
4 SQL statements in session.
Trace file: ora_296127_sbt1.trc
Trace file compatibility: 8.00.04
Sort options: default
0 session in tracefile.
4 user SQL statements in trace file.
0 session in tracefile.
4 user SQL statements in trace file.
0 internal SQL statements in trace file.
4 SQL statements in trace file.
3 unique SQL statements in trace file.
71606 lines in trace file.
ques :
1. what does the TKPROF tells me abt the sql statement ?? i can see
featch from disk is so high --> Fetch 2385 251.60 930.94 1550541
2. what can i do the fetch ?
pls advise

Hi ,
not sure if anyone noticed :
Execution Plan
0 SELECT STATEMENT Optimizer=HINT: ALL_ROWS (Cost=95736 Card=2
41727 Bytes=13778439)
1 0 NESTED LOOPS (Cost=95736 Card=241727 Bytes=13778439)
2 1 TABLE ACCESS (FULL) OF 'LOTRUN' (Cost=95736 Card=2148183
0 Bytes=988164180)
3 1 INDEX (UNIQUE SCAN) OF 'LOTRUN_ACTIVE_LOT_PK' (UNIQUE)
Statistics
0 recursive calls
109 db block gets
45035927 consistent gets
1572371 physical reads
792 redo size
34941587 bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
2387838 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
29477 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
2 sorts (memory)
0 sorts (disk)
442127 rows processed
=========================
does the cardinality and the no of row processed needs to be the same ? it different 442127 rows processed VS Card=241727 ??
and i select a count(*) its 442820 (new rows were added form the hourly jobs)
the stats were gathers in 21st august does it mean it's outdated ?
rdgs

Oracle Policy Automation

The requirement is to integrate OPA with ADF. So, the questions that come to my mind are:
-What would be the best way to integrate the two apps- java API or web services?
-On the OPA front, we plan to validate hierarchical structures that get created in ADF. How do you suggest we go about it, provided the levels of hierarchy might change dynamically?
-The only OPA entities that would be relevant to the ADF-OPA system(and that would determine the behaviour of ADF pages) would be the rule files and the property files. Please correct me if I am wrong and let me know if there exist more such entities so that we can exploit them while we are at it.

- I'd definitely suggest Web Services. Backwards compatibility is provided between versions, so you only need to migrate to a later version when you're ready, while still being able to take advantage of newer authoring features.
- OPA deals fine with hierarchies using self-referential relationships in the entity model, but they will be reference relationships rather than so-called "containment" relationships. This is fine, it just means you'll have a flat list of objects with references between them
- Yes you should be able to do everything you need by working with Word and Excel rule files and XML property files inside an OPA project. When you deploy, the rulebase .zip file is all you will need.

Why RBO might be better than CBO ?

Hi ,
I have a query that references 4 base tables , indexes have been created and analyzed
but when using CBO it's is very slow and it's fast when using the RULE hints.
is this something to do with the logic of the query ?
pls advise
tks & rdgs

hi ,
fyi its the same queries with 2 mode
-- using CHOOSE
SELECT
PT.PT_ID,
PD_INST.CALL_PD_NAME,
RCP.RCP_ID,
RCP.RCP_TITLE,
PD.PD_TITLE,
RCP.EQP_TYPE
FROM
PT,
PD_INST,
RCP,
PD,
PD_INST_RS
WHERE
( PT.PT_ID = PD_INST.PD_ID )
AND ( PD.PD_ID = PD_INST_RS.PD_ID )
AND ( (RCP.RCP_NAME = PD_INST_RS.RCP_NAME) AND (RCP.RCP_AF = 'A') )
AND ( (PD.PD_ID LIKE PD_INST.CALL_PD_NAME || '.%') AND (PD.PD_AF = 'A') )
AND (
( PT.PT_AF = 'A' )
AND ( PT.OF <> 'Y' )
AND ( PD.PD_AF = 'A' )
AND ( PD.OF <> 'Y' )
AND ( RCP.RCP_AF = 'A' )
AND ( RCP.OF <> 'Y' )
AND PD_INST.INST_NUM = 'ab3e12'
AND ( PD_INST_RS.HIE = 'Y' )
AND ( PD_INST_RS.MP = 'Y' )
AND PT.PRODSTATUS = 'A'
SELECT STATEMENT, GOAL = CHOOSE     Cardinality=1     Cost=268     Optimizer=CHOOSE
TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID     Cardinality=139     Cost=2     Optimizer=ANALYZED     Object name=PD_INST
NESTED LOOPS     Cardinality=1     Cost=268
   MERGE JOIN CARTESIAN     Cardinality=4     Cost=267
    TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID     Cardinality=1     Cost=3     Optimizer=ANALYZED     Object name=PD_INST_RS
     NESTED LOOPS     Cardinality=1     Cost=181
      MERGE JOIN CARTESIAN     Cardinality=29     Cost=111
       TABLE ACCESS FULL     Cardinality=1     Cost=25     Optimizer=ANALYZED     Object name=RCP
       BUFFER SORT     Cardinality=67     Cost=86
        TABLE ACCESS FULL     Cardinality=67     Cost=86     Optimizer=ANALYZED     Object name=PD
      INDEX RANGE SCAN     Cardinality=227     Cost=3     Optimizer=ANALYZED     Object name=PD_INST_RS_PK
    BUFFER SORT     Cardinality=165     Cost=264
     TABLE ACCESS FULL     Cardinality=165     Cost=86     Optimizer=ANALYZED     Object name=PT
   INDEX RANGE SCAN     Cardinality=1     Cost=2     Optimizer=ANALYZED     Object name=PD_INST_PK
-- using RULE
SELECT /*+ RULE */
PT.PT_ID,
PD_INST.CALL_PD_NAME,
RCP.RCP_ID,
RCP.RCP_TITLE,
PD.PD_TITLE,
RCP.EQP_TYPE
FROM
PT,
PD_INST,
RCP,
PD,
PD_INST_RS
WHERE
( PT.PT_ID = PD_INST.PD_ID )
AND ( PD.PD_ID = PD_INST_RS.PD_ID )
AND ( (RCP.RCP_NAME = PD_INST_RS.RCP_NAME) AND (RCP.RCP_AF = 'A') )
AND ( (PD.PD_ID LIKE PD_INST.CALL_PD_NAME || '.%') AND (PD.PD_AF = 'A') )
AND (
( PT.PT_AF = 'A' )
AND ( PT.OF <> 'Y' )
AND ( PD.PD_AF = 'A' )
AND ( PD.OF <> 'Y' )
AND ( RCP.RCP_AF = 'A' )
AND ( RCP.OF <> 'Y' )
AND PD_INST.INST_NUM = 'ab3e12'
AND ( PD_INST_RS.HIE = 'Y' )
AND ( PD_INST_RS.MP = 'Y' )
AND PT.PRODSTATUS = 'A'
SELECT STATEMENT, GOAL = HINT: RULE               Optimizer=HINT: RULE
TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID               Optimizer=ANALYZED     Object name=RCP
NESTED LOOPS
   NESTED LOOPS
    NESTED LOOPS
     NESTED LOOPS
      TABLE ACCESS FULL               Optimizer=ANALYZED     Object name=PD_INST
      TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID               Optimizer=ANALYZED     Object name=PT
       INDEX UNIQUE SCAN               Optimizer=ANALYZED     Object name=PT_PK
     TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID               Optimizer=ANALYZED     Object name=PD
      INDEX RANGE SCAN               Optimizer=ANALYZED     Object name=PD_IK03
    TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID               Optimizer=ANALYZED     Object name=PD_INST_RS
     INDEX RANGE SCAN               Optimizer=ANALYZED     Object name=PD_INST_RS_PK
   INDEX RANGE SCAN               Optimizer=ANALYZED     Object name=RCP_NDX_1tks & rgds

Excel rules optimization

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for