Firefox 4.0 runs much slower than FF 3.x and hangs

After using FF 3.x for some time, I upgraded to FF 4.0 as soon as it came out. I find that simple things, like switching tabs and reloading pages takes much more time that FF3.x. On many occasions, I've had to cancel FF and restart it. Sometimes this was multiple times a day. The worst part was using Facebook and Farmville (a Flash application). It would hang many time in a session to the point that what took less than an hour took three or more.
I finally tracked down the FF3.6 DL and reinstalled it and I find that the problem with FF4.0 no longer happens. In fact Farmville does not hang at all.
The interesting thing is that each version of FF has its own icon and directory, but when I have one open and try the other, a second copy of the version running opens.

http://support.mozilla.com/en-US/kb/Installing+a+previous+version+of+Firefox
http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/all-older.html

Similar Messages

I just upgraded to FF 4.0, and am overall unhappy with the app. It runs much slower than my previous version, and continually hangs...even on the Mozilla websites. I'm going to try and go back to my older version, which I loved.

As noted in my question, FF4.0 continually hangs (Not responding) even on your website.

http://support.mozilla.com/en-US/kb/Installing+a+previous+version+of+Firefox
http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/all-older.html

In CS6, JavaScript Running MUCH Slower than ActionScript

Hi All,
I am finding that in CS6, JS code runs MUCH slower than ActionScript code. I don't want to double-post here - Full details may be found where I posted them in the InDesign Scripting forum at - CS6 JavaScript Running Much Slower than ActionScript, before I realized that this forum might be more appropriate.
The basic gist of it is that I had a Flex/ActionScript Extension, which I obviously needed to start converting to JavaScript in advance of the next version not supporting ActionScript. I converted 20,000 lines of my business logic code from ActionScript to JavaScript (grrr...) - only to find that it now runs 5 times slower than it did in ActionScript.
What has been the experience of others who have converted large Extensions from ActionScript to JavaScript?
I would greatly appreciate any and all suggestions.
TIA,
mlavie

Hi All,
I am finding that in CS6, JS code runs MUCH slower than ActionScript code. I don't want to double-post here - Full details may be found where I posted them in the InDesign Scripting forum at - CS6 JavaScript Running Much Slower than ActionScript, before I realized that this forum might be more appropriate.
The basic gist of it is that I had a Flex/ActionScript Extension, which I obviously needed to start converting to JavaScript in advance of the next version not supporting ActionScript. I converted 20,000 lines of my business logic code from ActionScript to JavaScript (grrr...) - only to find that it now runs 5 times slower than it did in ActionScript.
What has been the experience of others who have converted large Extensions from ActionScript to JavaScript?
I would greatly appreciate any and all suggestions.
TIA,
mlavie

My four year old iMac is running much slower than when it was new. Any suggestions on cleaning out the cob webs?

My four year old iMac is running much slower than when it was new. Does anyone have any suggestions on what I can do to "clean it up" and get it running like it used to?

What year, screen size, CPU speed and amount of RAM installed?
To find out info about your system,
Click on the Apple symbol in the upper left of the OS X main menu bar. A drop down menu appears.
Click About this Mac. A smaller popup window appears. This gives you basic info like what version of OS X your iMac is running, the speed of your iMac's CPU and how much RAM is installed.
Click on the button that says More Info. A larger window appears giving you a complete overview of your iMac's hardware specs.
Highlight all of this info and copy/paste all of this into another reply to this post, editing out your iMac's serial number before actually posting the reply.
This will tell us everything about your iMac so we may begin to help with your iMac issues.
How full is your Mac's hard drive?
Locate your iMac's hard drive icon on the OS X desktop. Click the icon once, then use the keyboard key combination Command-I. This will give you additonal info about your iMac's internal hard drive.
Post this info in your reply here, also.
Here are some general tips to keep your Mac's hard drive trim and slim as possible
You should never, EVER let a conputer hard drive get completely full, EVER!
With Macs and OS X, you shouldn't let the hard drive get below 15 GBs or less of free data space.
If it does, it's time for some hard drive housecleaning.
Follow some of my tips for cleaning out, deleting and archiving data from your Mac's internal hard drive.
Have you emptied your Mac's Trash icon in the Dock?
If you use iPhoto, iPhoto has its own trash that needs to be emptied, also.
If you store images in other locations other than iPhoto, then you will have to weed through these to determine what to archive and what to delete.
If you use Apple Mail app, Apple Mail also has its own trash area that needs to be emptied, too!
Delete any old or no longer needed emails and/or archive to disc, flash drives or external hard drive, older emails you want to save.
Look through your other Mailboxes and other Mail categories to see If there is other mail you can archive and/or delete.
STAY AWAY FROM DELETING ANY FILES FROM OS X SYSTEM FOLDER!
Look through your Documents folder and delete any type of old useless type files like "Read Me" type files.
Again, archive to disc, flash drives, ext. hard drives or delete any old documents you no longer use or immediately need.
Look in your Applications folder, if you have applications you haven't used in a long time, if the app doesn't have a dedicated uninstaller, then you can simply drag it into the OS X Trash icon. IF the application has an uninstaller app, then use it to completely delete the app from your Mac.
To find other large files, download an app called Omni Disk Sweeper.
Download an app called OnyX for your version of OS X.
When you install and launch it, let it do its initial automatic tests, then go to the cleaning and maintenance tabs and run the maintenance tabs that let OnyX clean out all web browser cache files, web browser histories, system cache files, delete old error log files.
Typically, iTunes and iPhoto libraries are the biggest users of HD space.
move these files/data off of your internal drive to the external hard drive and deleted off of the internal hard drive.
If you have any other large folders of personal data or projects, these should be archived or moved, also, to the optical discs, flash drives or external hard drive and then either archived to disc and/or deleted off your internal hard drive.
Good Luck!

Anyone else? CS4 running much slower than CS3?

I just upgraded to CS4 from CS3. All of the applications are running much, much slower than CS3, particularly InDesign. My computer is literally fresh out of the box; specs below. Software and patches up to date. Thinking of uninstalling CS4 and reverting back to CS3. Any suggestions/feedback?
MacBook Pro 15"
2.66GHz Intel Core 2 Duo processor
4GB memory
320GB 5400-rpm hard drive
NVIDIA GeForce 9600M GT graphics processor with 256MB
1440 by 900 pixels
Snow Leopard OX
Purchased CS4 Master Collection. Other software installed includes iLife, iWork, Office for Mac.

I'm not using In Design yet, but for Photoshop and Acrobat my sense is that they are fast or faster than CS3, and Snow Leopard has reduced the launch time for all my apps compared with Leopard.
Yes there are issues with running Adobe apps with Snow Leopard, but some of them are the same issues when running CS3 apps with Leopard--and in any event, these are, I believe, all crashing bugs, not things that slow down responsiveness. I personally have had only a few problems with Design Std CS4 apps + Snow Leopard.

I just restored my 24 inch imac and it seems to be running MUCH slower than before. Any Ideas why? thanks in advance for your help!

I have erased and restored my 24 inch Intel iMac. I have upgraded to the last version of X os. My system is running WAY slower than it was before. Even opening windows seems to lag and the spinning wheel come up for everything. Every task is slow, even typing this! lol
Here are my specs:
Model Name:          iMac
Model Identifier:          iMac8,1
Processor Name:          Intel Core 2 Duo
Processor Speed:          2.8 GHz
Number Of Processors:          1
Total Number Of Cores:          2
L2 Cache:          6 MB
Memory:          4 GB
Bus Speed:          1.07 GHz
Boot ROM Version:          IM81.00C1.B00
SMC Version (system):          1.30f1
Any ideas would be helpful. Is this a hardware issue?
Thanks!

Matt:
Thanks for the update. It is good to know that the maintenance procedures helped. Regular maintenance and a good backup are key to computer security. Gulliver's article has a suggested schedule. Dr. Smoke's FAQ on Backup and Recovery has excellent information and advice. I part company with him on his insistence on Retrospect, which I have found to be difficult to use. SuperDuper has been shown the best backup software in these tests.
If you usually leave your computer on or asleep, it is good practice to shut down and start up in Safe Mode occausionally. I do it about once weekly.
Good luck.
cornelius
Message was edited by: cornelius

Parameterized queries running much slower than ones with hardcoded values

Very often there is a huge performance difference when using parameters in a query, compared to running the same code after replacing the parameters with hardcoded values: the parameterized version of the code runs much slower!
The case is not parameter sniffing as it is not a (compiled) stored proc, but code executed directly from the editor and the performance issue has been observed in different versions of SQL Server (2000 and 2005).
How is this explained and how can the parameterized queries have similar performance with the hardcoded ones?
Also, why does this happen in some cases and not always?
Finally, the same is sometimes the case with stored procs: a very slow running proc speeds up tremendously when running its code directly, instead of calling the procedure --and even faster, according to the previous, when its parameters are replaced with
hardcoded values

>>The case is not parameter sniffing as it is not a (compiled) stored proc, but code executed >>>directly
from the editor ?>>>and the performance issue has been observed in different >>>versions of SQL Server (2000 and 2005).
Something like below?
--SQL Server creates 3 execution plan rather only one
DBCC FREEPROCCACHE
GO
SELECT *
FROM Sales.SalesOrderHeader
WHERE SalesOrderID = 56000
GO
SELECT * FROM
AdventureWorks.Sales.SalesOrderHeader WHERE
SalesOrderID = 56001
GO
declare @i int
set @i = 56004
SELECT *
FROM Sales.SalesOrderHeader
WHERE SalesOrderID = @i
GO
select stats.execution_count AS exec_count,
p.size_in_bytes as [size],
[sql].[text] as [plan_text]
from sys.dm_exec_cached_plans p
outer apply sys.dm_exec_sql_text (p.plan_handle) sql
join sys.dm_exec_query_stats stats ON stats.plan_handle = p.plan_handle
GO
----This time only (we get parameterization)
DBCC FREEPROCCACHE
GO
EXEC sp_executesql N'SELECT SUM(LineTotal) AS LineTotal
FROM Sales.SalesOrderHeader H
JOIN Sales.SalesOrderDetail D ON D.SalesOrderID = H.SalesOrderID
WHERE H.SalesOrderID = @SalesOrderID', N'@SalesOrderID INT', 56000
GO
EXEC sp_executesql N'SELECT SUM(LineTotal) AS LineTotal
FROM Sales.SalesOrderHeader H
JOIN Sales.SalesOrderDetail D ON D.SalesOrderID = H.SalesOrderID
WHERE H.SalesOrderID = @SalesOrderID', N'@SalesOrderID INT', 56005
GO
select stats.execution_count AS exec_count,
LEFT([sql].[text], 80) as [plan_text]
from sys.dm_exec_cached_plans p
outer apply sys.dm_exec_sql_text (p.plan_handle) sql
join sys.dm_exec_query_stats stats ON stats.plan_handle = p.plan_handle
GO
Best Regards,Uri Dimant SQL Server MVP,
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/uri_dimant/
MS SQL optimization: MS SQL Development and Optimization
MS SQL Consulting:
Large scale of database and data cleansing
Remote DBA Services:
Improves MS SQL Database Performance
SQL Server Integration Services:
Business Intelligence

LRCC is running much slower than LR5

I just upgraded my Lightroom 5.7 stand-alone to Lightroom CC and it is much slower. I have a good laptop that is less than three years old, with 8GB RAM and a SSD. What's up? Thanks in advance!

Read this: GPU notes for Lightroom CC (2015).

After downloading the Firefox browser update "RadioWMPCoreGecko 5.dll" file my computer runs much slower than before. Ist there any help available?

Information by Norton Security, that ''RadioWMPCoreGecko 5.dll'' is safe. The installation started without any hesitation and -even worse - without asking my permission although my settings require this.

Here is a thread about a similar issue with RadioWMPGecko19.dll (no real answers)
*[[/questions/878063]]
*[[/questions/902381]]

CS6 JavaScript Running Much Slower than ActionScript

Dear All,
In advance of the next version of InDesign CC, which will only support HTML5 and JavaScript, I converted all of my Extension's business logic from ActionScript to JavaScript - about 20,000 lines of code.
I am using CS6 to run my Extension, and I call my JavaScript methods from within legacy Flex/ActionScript event-handler code using this methodology:
[Embed(source="MyJSModule1.jsx", mimeType= "application/octet-stream" )]
private static var _myJSModule1:Class;
[Embed(source="MyJSModule2.jsx", mimeType= "application/octet-stream" )]
private static var _myJSModule2:Class;
_interface = HostObject.getRoot(HostObject.extensions[0]);
public static function Initialize()
_interface.eval(new _myJSModule1.toString());
_interface.eval(new _myJSModule2.toString());
_interface.myJSMethod();
I have found that my InDesign Extension runs about 5 times slower in JavaScript than it did in ActionScript.
Posts I read on the web seemed to indicate that JS would only be about 30% slower.
Would the upcoming V8-based and Node.js-supporting environment be any faster?
I really, really need help with this.
TIA,
mlavie

Hmm,
at that project/code size you get at plenty points where things matter that would be irrelevant in smaller scripts. A few years ago I extended and re-architectured a similar project, by thorough optimizations we got an speed increase of roughly tenfold, of course partially eaten up by new features.
For the beginning: rather than issuing 80 evals, for deployment I'd compile such an enormous pile of sources into a single file. For debugging, #include is much more fun.
As you mention argument passing of large xml, that's one area where ExtendScript can seriously slow down. Besides you'll probably find a size limit of about 64k for the underlying XML. We used InDesign document XML for working data, while smaller configuration data was parsed into js objects as soon as possible. I wrote a JSX abstraction layer that would work on either kind of XML.
Next problem - number of prototype slots. It definitely makes a difference if you have too much, I partitioned objects into cross-linked clusters, similar to the plugin object model (boss classes), the whole enchilada supported by an underlying framework that generated JSX collections etc. by a few declarations, roughly the equivalent to templates in other languages.
At least you're using prototypes - one really big issue with ExtendScript is the explosion of object allocations when you apply the typical closure-based JavaScript style from web programming. Eliminating them was a very big effort in our rewrite, but also gave a pretty good improvement. At least ExtendScript can produce allocation statistics, use them. Also use them to find and eliminate circular link object leaks etc. A while ago I wrote a diff utility that extends $.summary(), InDesign Server also has some goodies.
Have you noticed ESTK's profiler? Unfortunately it just gave up at our code size, probably it will also for yours. Instead I used an own profiler with several additions, e.g. I could apply the profiler selectively to some modules while already optimized modules were skipped. It really helps to know your candidates when management pressures for "quick wins" ... Where is most absolute computation time burnt, or what methods are invoked a couple 10000 times too often for your gut feeling. Again, eliminate dead code and thus reduce prototype/object slot count. When your central class has 100s properties and matching get/set methods, eliminating them one by one produces measurable improvements.
Of course I also tracked down some offending statements where the same value was assigned over and over again causing severe text recomposition while nothing was actually changed ... You can only find such problems with exact measurements.
Other areas of fun: under the hood (at C++ level) every temporary text expression is backed by an enormous aggregation "suite", there are many things you can do wrong there. For example these things just pile up and are rarely purged, therefor it has become common wisdom to do an occasional save() for lengthy scripts.
Again at the XML side: if you do severe document XML (we did), there are some circumstances where text attributes will get lost/ignored. There are ways to speed up expressions underlying references to document XML, and so forth. To know when to rebuild the XML expressions or when they can be reused is a science for itself. Same goes for other objects, as you already mention getElements(). Sometimes it helps, sometimes it is just a waste of execution time.
As you mention the advantage of SSDs: How frequently do you dump those jsx sources into ExtendScript? If you currently use the "main" session (is that possible for HTML extensions at all?), utilize persistent sessions instead - when you have eliminated your object leaks.
There are plenty more optimizations, I probably should write a book - to be sold in about 5 copies. Unfortunately the strongest advice in its preface would be to not use ExtendScript/JavaScript at all for large scale projects, because they turn into a maintenance nightmare where other languages catch errors on compile time. Dependent on client preference I'd probably turn to Java or do the whole thing in C++, at increasing code size development speed will be roughly on par.

Firefox seems to run much slower after the update. My computer is old. Can I go back to an older version?

Does the new firefox require a better computer than the old versions? My internet has seemed to slow down considerably after updating to firefox 7. Is the new version of firefox the problem, or is it something else wrong with my computer? If it is firefox, how do I go back to another version?

See http://kb.mozillazine.org/Installing_Firefox
The most recent Firefox version for OS X 10.2 and 10.3 is 2.0.0.20.
Mac: http://download.mozilla.org/?product=firefox-2.0.0.20&os=osx&lang=en-US

1.4 version of tool runs MUCH slower than 1.3???

Hi!! I have a desktop application that I had made using 1.3. I've now successfully upgrade to 1.4.2, however I've noticed significantly slower performance with the newer version. Has anyone else experienced this? What can be done to remedy the situation??
Katie

This is serious issue. The repaint capability is in the order of minute vs seconds on Microsoft platforms running the 1.4 version. This is causing serious customer issues.

To run a piece of PL/SQL code, in TT is much slower than in ORACLE.

A piece of PL/SQL code , about 1500 lines, package is named rtmon_event, function in it is named rtmon_SHOLD_CUS_RPT;
the PL/SQL code is run in ORACLE.
Now I want to get fast speed, I think of TT.
I rewrite the PL/SQL code by grammer in TT.
But the speed in TT is much slower than the speed in ORACLE.
In ORACLE, to run the PL/SQL code, it need 80 seconds; but In TT, to run the PL/SQL code, it need 183 seconds;
How can I resolve the problem?
Btw: there are some joins of 2 tables, or 3 tables in rtmon_event.rtmon_SHOLD_CUS_RPT, and some complex DML in it.
The run method is :
declare
a number;
begin
a := rtmon_event.rtmon_SHOLD_CUS_RPT ;
end;
Thanks a lot.

The easiest way to view a plan is to use ttIsql and issue the command:
explain SQL-statement;
For example:
explain select a.ol1, b.col2 from taba a, tab b where a.key = b.key;
See the documentation that 'hitgon' pointed you to to help you interpret the plans.
Chris

Firefox 4.0 freezes, crashes, closes, changes screens, does not respond, and runs 8X SLOWER than 3.6.

Firefox 4.0 is the WORST browser I have ever seen. It freezes, crashes, closes, changes screens, does not respond, and runs 8X SLOWER than 3.6. Tasks I used to do in 30 minutes, now takes me 40 minutes or more. I went back to 3.6 and immediately had a tremendous improvement.
Mozilla needs to get rid of this load of lies about a new crap program, and go back to the 3.6 version. Version 4.0 is WORST than any other program I have ever seen.

The slow / hesitant scrolling problem seems to be an artifact of the database Firefox uses to keep track of where you go, what you do, etc. It uses sqlite databases which get fragmented over time.
There are several fixes:
Some are add-ons and work internally, such as Vacuum Places (search the addons for it).
Some are external. Speedyfox is one I just tried, and found to work quite well. I think it did a better job than Vacuum Places, but requires Firefox to be shut down before it can work properly.
Find Speedyfox using a web search.

A SQL tuning issue-sql runs much slower in test than in production?

Hi Buddies,
I am working on a sql tuning issue. A sql runs much slower in test than in production.
I compared the two explain plans in test and production
seems in test, CBO refuses to use index SUBLEDGER_ENTRY_I2.
we rebuile it and re-gether that index statistcs. run, still slow..
I compared the init.ora parameters like hash_area_size, sort_area_size in test, they are same as production.
I wonder if any expert friend can show some light.
in production,
SQL> set autotrace traceonly
SQL> SELECT rpt_horizon_subledger_entry_vw.onst_offst_cd,
2 rpt_horizon_subledger_entry_vw.bkng_prd,
3 rpt_horizon_subledger_entry_vw.systm_afflt_cd,
4 rpt_horizon_subledger_entry_vw.jrnl_id,
5 rpt_horizon_subledger_entry_vw.ntrl_accnt_cd,
6 rpt_horizon_subledger_entry_vw.gnrl_ldgr_chrt_of_accnt_nm,
7 rpt_horizon_subledger_entry_vw.lgl_entty_brnch_cd,
8 rpt_horizon_subledger_entry_vw.crprt_melob_cd AS corp_mlb_cd,
rpt_horizon_subledger_entry_vw.onst_offst_cd, SUM (amt) AS amount
9 10 FROM rpt_horizon_subledger_entry_vw
11 WHERE rpt_horizon_subledger_entry_vw.bkng_prd = '092008'
12 AND rpt_horizon_subledger_entry_vw.jrnl_id = 'RCS0002100'
13 AND rpt_horizon_subledger_entry_vw.systm_afflt_cd = 'SAFF01'
14 GROUP BY rpt_horizon_subledger_entry_vw.onst_offst_cd,
15 rpt_horizon_subledger_entry_vw.bkng_prd,
16 rpt_horizon_subledger_entry_vw.systm_afflt_cd,
17 rpt_horizon_subledger_entry_vw.jrnl_id,
18 rpt_horizon_subledger_entry_vw.ntrl_accnt_cd,
19 rpt_horizon_subledger_entry_vw.gnrl_ldgr_chrt_of_accnt_nm,
20 rpt_horizon_subledger_entry_vw.lgl_entty_brnch_cd,
21 rpt_horizon_subledger_entry_vw.crprt_melob_cd,
22 rpt_horizon_subledger_entry_vw.onst_offst_cd;
491 rows selected.
Execution Plan
0 SELECT STATEMENT Optimizer=CHOOSE (Cost=130605 Card=218764 B
ytes=16407300)
1 0 SORT (GROUP BY) (Cost=130605 Card=218764 Bytes=16407300)
2 1 VIEW OF 'RPT_HORIZON_SUBLEDGER_ENTRY_VW' (Cost=129217 Ca
rd=218764 Bytes=16407300)
3 2 SORT (UNIQUE) (Cost=129217 Card=218764 Bytes=35877296)
4 3 UNION-ALL
5 4 HASH JOIN (Cost=61901 Card=109382 Bytes=17719884)
6 5 TABLE ACCESS (FULL) OF 'GNRL_LDGR_CHRT_OF_ACCNT'
(Cost=2 Card=111 Bytes=3774)
7 5 HASH JOIN (Cost=61897 Card=109382 Bytes=14000896
8 7 TABLE ACCESS (FULL) OF 'SUBLEDGER_CHART_OF_ACC
OUNT' (Cost=2 Card=57 Bytes=1881)
9 7 HASH JOIN (Cost=61893 Card=109382 Bytes=103912
90)
10 9 TABLE ACCESS (FULL) OF 'HORIZON_LINE' (Cost=
34 Card=4282 Bytes=132742)
11 9 HASH JOIN (Cost=61833 Card=109390 Bytes=7000
960)
12 11 TABLE ACCESS (BY INDEX ROWID) OF 'SUBLEDGE
R_ENTRY' (Cost=42958 Card=82076 Bytes=3611344)
13 12 INDEX (RANGE SCAN) OF 'SUBLEDGER_ENTRY_I
2' (NON-UNIQUE) (Cost=1069 Card=328303)
14 11 TABLE ACCESS (FULL) OF 'HORIZON_SUBLEDGER_
LINK' (Cost=14314 Card=9235474 Bytes=184709480)
15 4 HASH JOIN (Cost=61907 Card=109382 Bytes=18157412)
16 15 TABLE ACCESS (FULL) OF 'GNRL_LDGR_CHRT_OF_ACCNT'
(Cost=2 Card=111 Bytes=3774)
17 15 HASH JOIN (Cost=61903 Card=109382 Bytes=14438424
18 17 TABLE ACCESS (FULL) OF 'SUBLEDGER_CHART_OF_ACC
OUNT' (Cost=2 Card=57 Bytes=1881)
19 17 HASH JOIN (Cost=61899 Card=109382 Bytes=108288
18)
20 19 TABLE ACCESS (FULL) OF 'HORIZON_LINE' (Cost=
34 Card=4282 Bytes=132742)
21 19 HASH JOIN (Cost=61838 Card=109390 Bytes=7438
520)
22 21 TABLE ACCESS (BY INDEX ROWID) OF 'SUBLEDGE
R_ENTRY' (Cost=42958 Card=82076 Bytes=3939648)
23 22 INDEX (RANGE SCAN) OF 'SUBLEDGER_ENTRY_I
2' (NON-UNIQUE) (Cost=1069 Card=328303)
24 21 TABLE ACCESS (FULL) OF 'HORIZON_SUBLEDGER_
LINK' (Cost=14314 Card=9235474 Bytes=184709480)
Statistics
25 recursive calls
18 db block gets
343266 consistent gets
370353 physical reads
0 redo size
15051 bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
1007 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
34 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
1 sorts (memory)
1 sorts (disk)
491 rows processed
in test
SQL> set autotrace traceonly
SQL> SELECT rpt_horizon_subledger_entry_vw.onst_offst_cd,
2 rpt_horizon_subledger_entry_vw.bkng_prd,
3 rpt_horizon_subledger_entry_vw.systm_afflt_cd,
4 rpt_horizon_subledger_entry_vw.jrnl_id,
5 rpt_horizon_subledger_entry_vw.ntrl_accnt_cd,
rpt_horizon_subledger_entry_vw.gnrl_ldgr_chrt_of_accnt_nm,
6 7 rpt_horizon_subledger_entry_vw.lgl_entty_brnch_cd,
8 rpt_horizon_subledger_entry_vw.crprt_melob_cd AS corp_mlb_cd,
9 rpt_horizon_subledger_entry_vw.onst_offst_cd, SUM (amt) AS amount
10 FROM rpt_horizon_subledger_entry_vw
11 WHERE rpt_horizon_subledger_entry_vw.bkng_prd = '092008'
12 AND rpt_horizon_subledger_entry_vw.jrnl_id = 'RCS0002100'
AND rpt_horizon_subledger_entry_vw.systm_afflt_cd = 'SAFF01'
13 14 GROUP BY rpt_horizon_subledger_entry_vw.onst_offst_cd,
15 rpt_horizon_subledger_entry_vw.bkng_prd,
16 rpt_horizon_subledger_entry_vw.systm_afflt_cd,
17 rpt_horizon_subledger_entry_vw.jrnl_id,
18 rpt_horizon_subledger_entry_vw.ntrl_accnt_cd,
rpt_horizon_subledger_entry_vw.gnrl_ldgr_chrt_of_accnt_nm,
rpt_horizon_subledger_entry_vw.lgl_entty_brnch_cd,
rpt_horizon_subledger_entry_vw.crprt_melob_cd,
rpt_horizon_subledger_entry_vw.onst_offst_cd; 19 20 21 22
no rows selected
Execution Plan
0 SELECT STATEMENT Optimizer=CHOOSE (Cost=92944 Card=708 Bytes
=53100)
1 0 SORT (GROUP BY) (Cost=92944 Card=708 Bytes=53100)
2 1 VIEW OF 'RPT_HORIZON_SUBLEDGER_ENTRY_VW' (Cost=92937 Car
d=708 Bytes=53100)
3 2 SORT (UNIQUE) (Cost=92937 Card=708 Bytes=124962)
4 3 UNION-ALL
5 4 HASH JOIN (Cost=46456 Card=354 Bytes=60180)
6 5 TABLE ACCESS (FULL) OF 'SUBLEDGER_CHART_OF_ACCOU
NT' (Cost=2 Card=57 Bytes=1881)
7 5 NESTED LOOPS (Cost=46453 Card=354 Bytes=48498)
8 7 HASH JOIN (Cost=11065 Card=17694 Bytes=1362438
9 8 HASH JOIN (Cost=27 Card=87 Bytes=5133)
10 9 TABLE ACCESS (FULL) OF 'HORIZON_LINE' (Cos
t=24 Card=87 Bytes=2175)
11 9 TABLE ACCESS (FULL) OF 'GNRL_LDGR_CHRT_OF_
ACCNT' (Cost=2 Card=111 Bytes=3774)
12 8 TABLE ACCESS (FULL) OF 'HORIZON_SUBLEDGER_LI
NK' (Cost=11037 Card=142561 Bytes=2566098)
13 7 TABLE ACCESS (BY INDEX ROWID) OF 'SUBLEDGER_EN
TRY' (Cost=2 Card=1 Bytes=60)
14 13 INDEX (UNIQUE SCAN) OF 'SUBLEDGER_ENTRY_PK'
(UNIQUE) (Cost=1 Card=1)
15 4 HASH JOIN (Cost=46456 Card=354 Bytes=64782)
16 15 TABLE ACCESS (FULL) OF 'SUBLEDGER_CHART_OF_ACCOU
NT' (Cost=2 Card=57 Bytes=1881)
17 15 NESTED LOOPS (Cost=46453 Card=354 Bytes=53100)
18 17 HASH JOIN (Cost=11065 Card=17694 Bytes=1362438
19 18 HASH JOIN (Cost=27 Card=87 Bytes=5133)
20 19 TABLE ACCESS (FULL) OF 'HORIZON_LINE' (Cos
t=24 Card=87 Bytes=2175)
21 19 TABLE ACCESS (FULL) OF 'GNRL_LDGR_CHRT_OF_
ACCNT' (Cost=2 Card=111 Bytes=3774)
22 18 TABLE ACCESS (FULL) OF 'HORIZON_SUBLEDGER_LI
NK' (Cost=11037 Card=142561 Bytes=2566098)
23 17 TABLE ACCESS (BY INDEX ROWID) OF 'SUBLEDGER_EN
TRY' (Cost=2 Card=1 Bytes=73)
24 23 INDEX (UNIQUE SCAN) OF 'SUBLEDGER_ENTRY_PK'
(UNIQUE) (Cost=1 Card=1)
Statistics
1134 recursive calls
0 db block gets
38903505 consistent gets
598254 physical reads
60 redo size
901 bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
461 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
1 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
34 sorts (memory)
0 sorts (disk)
0 rows processed
Thanks a lot in advance
Jerry

Hi
Basically there are two kinds of tables
- fact
- lookup
The number of records in a lookup table is usually small.
The number of records in a fact table is usually huge.
However, in test systems the number of records in a fact table is often also small.
This results in different execution plans.
I notice again you don't post version and platform info, and you didn't make sure your explain is properly idented
Please read the FAQ to make sure it is properly idented.
Also using the word 'buddies' is as far as I am concerned nearing disrespect and rudeness.
Sybrand Bakker
Senior Oracle DBA

Firefox 4.0 runs much slower than FF 3.x and hangs

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for