How to know if executing a query cost long time

Hi,
I have a question about how to figure out if execution of a query takes long time. I am building a web application in java. The back end database is oracle. If a query is too large, I want to put show the user the error message to let the user make more specific query. but how can I tell if the query execution takes long time? Thanks.

The following link may be of help.
http://download-west.oracle.com/docs/cd/B10501_01/server.920/a96536/ch3175.htm#1123208

Similar Messages

Is index range scan the reason for query running long time

I would like to know whether index range scan is the reason for the query running long time. Below is the explain plan. If so, how to optimise it? Please help
Operation     Object     COST     CARDINALITY     BYTES
SELECT STATEMENT ()          413     1000     265000
COUNT (STOPKEY)
FILTER ()
TABLE ACCESS (BY INDEX ROWID)     ORDERS     413     58720     15560800
INDEX (RANGE SCAN)     IDX_SERV_PROV_ID     13     411709
TABLE ACCESS (BY INDEX ROWID)     ADDRESSES     2     1     14
INDEX (UNIQUE SCAN)     SYS_C004605     1     1
TABLE ACCESS (BY INDEX ROWID)     ADDRESSES     2     1     14
INDEX (UNIQUE SCAN)     SYS_C004605     1     1
TABLE ACCESS (BY INDEX ROWID)     ADDRESSES     2     1     14
INDEX (UNIQUE SCAN)     SYS_C004605     1     1

The index range scan means that the optimiser has determined that it is better to read the index rather than perform a full table scan. So in answer to your question - quite possibly but the alternative might take even longer!
The best thing to do is to review your query and check that you need every table included in the query and that you are accessing the tables via the best route. For example if you can access a table via primary key index that would be better than using a non-unique index. But the best way of reducing the time the query takes to run is to give it less tables (and indexes) to read.
John Seaman
http://www.asktheoracle.net

Oracle resultset.last() will cost long time while the resultset is large

we want to get the count of returned resultset rows through used last() & getRowNum() of oracle resultset . But this way the oracle driver will cache all rows in memory of our local machine and cost long time . we thought the resultset maybe cost many time on network.
can i set any preferences,make rs.last don't transfer by network and the last() method only work in DB server.
how to solve the problem.
thanks so much~!

No. The way Oracle cursors work, the only way to find out how many rows are in a ResultSet is to fetch each row. Since cursors are read-only structures, the driver has to cache the result if it is going to allow you to retrieve the data without re-executing the query. Increasing your fetch size may decrease the amount of time required to fetch all the rows, but you'll still have to go through all that effort.
One alternative would be to add a COUNT(*) (or more generically COUNT(*) OVER ()) to the query and use that value (which will be repeated for every row in the result) to determine how many rows are being returned.
Justin

Query taking long time for EXTRACTING the data more than 24 hours

Hi ,
Query taking long time for EXTRACTING the data more than 24 hours please find the query and explain plan details below even indexes avilable on table's goe's to FULL TABLE SCAN. please suggest me.......
SQL> explain plan for select a.account_id,round(a.account_balance,2) account_balance,
2 nvl(ah.invoice_id,ah.adjustment_id) transaction_id,
to_char(ah.effective_start_date,'DD-MON-YYYY') transaction_date,
to_char(nvl(i.payment_due_date,
to_date('30-12-9999','dd-mm-yyyy')),'DD-MON-YYYY')
due_date, ah.current_balance-ah.previous_balance amount,
decode(ah.invoice_id,null,'A','I') transaction_type
3 4 5 6 7 8 from account a,account_history ah,invoice i_+
where a.account_id=ah.account_id
and a.account_type_id=1000002
and round(a.account_balance,2) > 0
and (ah.invoice_id is not null or ah.adjustment_id is not null)
and ah.CURRENT_BALANCE > ah.previous_balance
and ah.invoice_id=i.invoice_id(+)
AND a.account_balance > 0
order by a.account_id,ah.effective_start_date desc; 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Explained.
SQL> select * from table(dbms_xplan.display);
PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
| Id | Operation | Name | Rows | Bytes |TempSpc| Cost (%CPU)|
| 0 | SELECT STATEMENT | | 544K| 30M| | 693K (20)|
| 1 | SORT ORDER BY | | 544K| 30M| 75M| 693K (20)|
|* 2 | HASH JOIN | | 544K| 30M| | 689K (20)|
|* 3 | TABLE ACCESS FULL | ACCOUNT | 20080 | 294K| | 6220 (18)|
|* 4 | HASH JOIN OUTER | | 131M| 5532M| 5155M| 678K (20)|
|* 5 | TABLE ACCESS FULL| ACCOUNT_HISTORY | 131M| 3646M| | 197K (25)|
| 6 | TABLE ACCESS FULL| INVOICE | 262M| 3758M| | 306K (18)|
Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
2 - access("A"."ACCOUNT_ID"="AH"."ACCOUNT_ID")
3 - filter("A"."ACCOUNT_TYPE_ID"=1000002 AND "A"."ACCOUNT_BALANCE">0 AND
ROUND("A"."ACCOUNT_BALANCE",2)>0)
4 - access("AH"."INVOICE_ID"="I"."INVOICE_ID"(+))
5 - filter("AH"."CURRENT_BALANCE">"AH"."PREVIOUS_BALANCE" AND ("AH"."INVOICE_ID"
IS NOT NULL OR "AH"."ADJUSTMENT_ID" IS NOT NULL))
22 rows selected.
Index Details:+_
SQL> select INDEX_OWNER,INDEX_NAME,COLUMN_NAME,TABLE_NAME from dba_ind_columns where
2 table_name in ('INVOICE','ACCOUNT','ACCOUNT_HISTORY') order by 4;
INDEX_OWNER INDEX_NAME COLUMN_NAME TABLE_NAME
OPS$SVM_SRV4 P_ACCOUNT ACCOUNT_ID ACCOUNT
OPS$SVM_SRV4 U_ACCOUNT_NAME ACCOUNT_NAME ACCOUNT
OPS$SVM_SRV4 U_ACCOUNT CUSTOMER_NODE_ID ACCOUNT
OPS$SVM_SRV4 U_ACCOUNT ACCOUNT_TYPE_ID ACCOUNT
OPS$SVM_SRV4 I_ACCOUNT_ACCOUNT_TYPE ACCOUNT_TYPE_ID ACCOUNT
OPS$SVM_SRV4 I_ACCOUNT_INVOICE INVOICE_ID ACCOUNT
OPS$SVM_SRV4 I_ACCOUNT_PREVIOUS_INVOICE PREVIOUS_INVOICE_ID ACCOUNT
OPS$SVM_SRV4 U_ACCOUNT_NAME_ID ACCOUNT_NAME ACCOUNT
OPS$SVM_SRV4 U_ACCOUNT_NAME_ID ACCOUNT_ID ACCOUNT
OPS$SVM_SRV4 I_LAST_MODIFIED_ACCOUNT LAST_MODIFIED ACCOUNT
OPS$SVM_SRV4 I_ACCOUNT_INVOICE_ACCOUNT INVOICE_ACCOUNT_ID ACCOUNT
OPS$SVM_SRV4 I_ACCOUNT_HISTORY_ACCOUNT ACCOUNT_ID ACCOUNT_HISTORY
OPS$SVM_SRV4 I_ACCOUNT_HISTORY_ACCOUNT SEQNR ACCOUNT_HISTORY
OPS$SVM_SRV4 I_ACCOUNT_HISTORY_INVOICE INVOICE_ID ACCOUNT_HISTORY
OPS$SVM_SRV4 I_ACCOUNT_HISTORY_ADINV INVOICE_ID ACCOUNT_HISTORY
OPS$SVM_SRV4 I_ACCOUNT_HISTORY_CIA CURRENT_BALANCE ACCOUNT_HISTORY
OPS$SVM_SRV4 I_ACCOUNT_HISTORY_CIA INVOICE_ID ACCOUNT_HISTORY
OPS$SVM_SRV4 I_ACCOUNT_HISTORY_CIA ADJUSTMENT_ID ACCOUNT_HISTORY
OPS$SVM_SRV4 I_ACCOUNT_HISTORY_CIA ACCOUNT_ID ACCOUNT_HISTORY
OPS$SVM_SRV4 I_ACCOUNT_HISTORY_LMOD LAST_MODIFIED ACCOUNT_HISTORY
OPS$SVM_SRV4 I_ACCOUNT_HISTORY_ADINV ADJUSTMENT_ID ACCOUNT_HISTORY
OPS$SVM_SRV4 I_ACCOUNT_HISTORY_PAYMENT PAYMENT_ID ACCOUNT_HISTORY
OPS$SVM_SRV4 I_ACCOUNT_HISTORY_ADJUSTMENT ADJUSTMENT_ID ACCOUNT_HISTORY
OPS$SVM_SRV4 I_ACCOUNT_HISTORY_APPLIED_DT APPLIED_DATE ACCOUNT_HISTORY
OPS$SVM_SRV4 P_INVOICE INVOICE_ID INVOICE
OPS$SVM_SRV4 U_INVOICE CUSTOMER_INVOICE_STR INVOICE
OPS$SVM_SRV4 I_LAST_MODIFIED_INVOICE LAST_MODIFIED INVOICE
OPS$SVM_SRV4 U_INVOICE_ACCOUNT ACCOUNT_ID INVOICE
OPS$SVM_SRV4 U_INVOICE_ACCOUNT BILL_RUN_ID INVOICE
OPS$SVM_SRV4 I_INVOICE_BILL_RUN BILL_RUN_ID INVOICE
OPS$SVM_SRV4 I_INVOICE_INVOICE_TYPE INVOICE_TYPE_ID INVOICE
OPS$SVM_SRV4 I_INVOICE_CUSTOMER_NODE CUSTOMER_NODE_ID INVOICE
32 rows selected.
Regards,
Bathula
Oracle-DBA

I have some suggestions. But first, you realize that you have some redundant indexes, right? You have an index on account(account_name) and also account(account_name, account_id), and also account_history(invoice_id) and account_history(invoice_id, adjustment_id). No matter, I will suggest some new composite indexes.
Also, you do not need two lines for these conditions:
and round(a.account_balance, 2) > 0
AND a.account_balance > 0
You can just use: and a.account_balance >= 0.005
So the formatted query isselect a.account_id,
       round(a.account_balance, 2) account_balance,
       nvl(ah.invoice_id, ah.adjustment_id) transaction_id,
       to_char(ah.effective_start_date, 'DD-MON-YYYY') transaction_date,
       to_char(nvl(i.payment_due_date, to_date('30-12-9999', 'dd-mm-yyyy')),
               'DD-MON-YYYY') due_date,
       ah.current_balance - ah.previous_balance amount,
       decode(ah.invoice_id, null, 'A', 'I') transaction_type
from account a, account_history ah, invoice i
where a.account_id = ah.account_id
   and a.account_type_id = 1000002
   and (ah.invoice_id is not null or ah.adjustment_id is not null)
   and ah.CURRENT_BALANCE > ah.previous_balance
   and ah.invoice_id = i.invoice_id(+)
   AND a.account_balance >= .005
order by a.account_id, ah.effective_start_date desc;You will probably want to select:
1. From ACCOUNT first (your smaller table), for which you supply a literal on account_type_id. That should limit the accounts retrieved from ACCOUNT_HISTORY
2. From ACCOUNT_HISTORY. We want to limit the records as much as possible on this table because of the outer join.
3. INVOICE we want to access last because it seems to be least restricted, it is the biggest, and it has the outer join condition so it will manufacture rows to match as many rows as come back from account_history.
Try the query above after creating the following composite indexes. The order of the columns is important:create index account_composite_i on account(account_type_id, account_balance, account_id);
create index acct_history_comp_i on account_history(account_id, invoice_id, adjustment_id, current_balance, previous_balance, effective_start_date);
create index invoice_composite_i on invoice(invoice_id, payment_due_date);All the columns used in the where clause will be indexed, in a logical order suited to the needs of the query. Plus each selected column is indexed as well so that we should not need to touch the tables at all to satisfy the query.
Try the query after creating these indexes.
A final suggestion is to try larger sort and hash area sizes and a manual workarea policy.alter session set workarea_size_policy = manual;
alter session set sort_area_size = 2147483647;
alter session set hash_area_size = 2147483647;

Why update query takes long time ?

Hello everyone;
My update query takes long time. In emp ( self testing) just having 2 records.
when i issue update query , it takes long time;
SQL> select * from emp;
EID ENAME     EQUAL     ESALARY     ECITY    EPERK       ECONTACT_NO
      2   rose              mca                  22000   calacutta                   9999999999
      1   sona             msc                  17280    pune                          9999999999
Elapsed: 00:00:00.05
SQL> update emp set esalary=12000 where eid='1';
update emp set esalary=12000 where eid='1'
* ERROR at line 1:
ORA-01013: user requested cancel of current operation
Elapsed: 00:01:11.72
SQL> update emp set esalary=15000;
update emp set esalary=15000
* ERROR at line 1:
ORA-01013: user requested cancel of current operation
Elapsed: 00:02:22.27

Hi BCV;
Thanks for your reply but it doesn't provide output, please see   this.
SQL> update emp set esalary=15000;
........... Lock already occured.
>> trying to trace >>
SQL> select HOLDING_SESSION from dba_blockers;
HOLDING_SESSION
            144
SQL> select sid , username, event from v$session where username='HR';
SID USERNAME     EVENT
   144   HR    SQL*Net message from client
   151   HR    enq: TX - row lock contention
   159   HR    SQL*Net message from client
>> It does n 't provide clear output about transaction lock >>
SQL> SELECT username, v$lock.SID, TRUNC (id1 / POWER (2, 16)) rbs,
2 BITAND (id1, TO_NUMBER ('ffff', 'xxxx')) + 0 slot, id2 seq, lmode,
3 request
4 FROM v$lock, v$session
5 WHERE v$lock.TYPE = 'TX'
6 AND v$lock.SID = v$session.SID
7 AND v$session.username = USER;
no rows selected
SQL> select MACHINE from v$session where sid = :sid;
SP2-0552: Bind variable "SID" not declared.

Select query running long time

Hi,
DB version : 10g
platform : sunos
My select sql query running long time (more than 20hrs) .Still running .
Is there any way to find sql query completion time approximately. (Pending time)
Also is there any possibilities to increase the speed of sql query (already running) like adding hints.
Please help me on this .
Thanks

Hi Sathish thanks for your reply,
I have already checked in V$SESSION_LONGOPS .But it's showing TIME_REMAINING -->0
select TOTALWORK,SOFAR,START_TIME,TIME_REMAINING from V$SESSION_LONGOPS where SID='10'
TOTALWORK SOFAR START_TIME TIME_REMAINING
1099759 1099759 27-JAN-11 0Any idea ?
Thanks.

My wife was given a 5s and she sent her 4s to her daughter in Thailand to use. The problem is the 4s needs to have the imei number unlocked. We need assistance on how that can be done. We are long time Verizon customers.

My wife was given a 5s and she sent her 4s to her daughter in Thailand to use. The problem is the 4s needs to have the imei number unlocked. We need assistance on how that can be done. We are long time Verizon customers.

Your daughter will have to send it back to you. You will have to reactivate it on you line. You will then have to request to have it unlocked. See THIS thread for more information.

How to know whether a particular query is using the aggregates

hi all....
im very new to this group so plz help me out.....anyway hi to all ....
There are many aggreegates are there but how to know which query is using perticular a?gregates

Hi,
use query monitor screen RSRT and select the option execute + debug . and u can have the option of checking display aggreagates for that query!
cheers,
ravi

Query takes long time - Please help!

I've a query like below (not actual query)
update (select eds.title eds_title,edv.title edv_title from mia_data_staging eds, mia_doc_Versions edv where eds.id = edv.id and eds.title != edv.title) set edv_title = eds_title;
In the above query I've more than 70 columns to select, compare and update (I've shown only one above). The explain plan for the query is below, which does not show any significant time, but the query never returns when executed after a long long time. Any ideas?
Plan hash value: 2242214163
| Id | OpMIAtion | Name | Rows | Bytes |TempSpc| Cost (%CPU)| Time |
| 0 | UPDATE STATEMENT | | 1627K| 1405M| | 18E (1)| |
| 1 | UPDATE | MIA_DOC_VERSIONS | | | | | |
|* 2 | HASH JOIN | | 1627K| 1405M| 720M| 18E (1)| |
| 3 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID | MIA_DOC_VERSIONS | 1627K| 701M| | 18E (1)| |
| 4 | BITMAP CONVERSION TO ROWIDS| | | | | | |
| 5 | BITMAP INDEX FULL SCAN | IDX_30 | | | | | |
PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
| 6 | TABLE ACCESS FULL | MIA_DATA_STAGING | 1628K| 705M| | 7184 (3)| 00:02:29 |
Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
---------------------------------------------------

user652494 wrote:
I've a query like below (not actual query)
|   3 |    TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID | MIA_DOC_VERSIONS | 1627K|   701M|       |    18E (1)|          |
|   4 |     BITMAP CONVERSION TO ROWIDS|                  |       |       |       |            |          |
|   5 |      BITMAP INDEX FULL SCAN    | IDX_30           |       |       |       |            |          |This part of your execution plan looks very suspicious: It's performing a bitmap index full scan to do then a single row access by rowid apparently for all rows of the table, which seems to be a very inefficient operation. It also shows an unreasonable cost for that operation. The question is why it is not using a "full table scan" to access the MIA_DOC_VERSIONS table?
You might want to try simply the FULL hint to request a full table scan on the MIA_DOC_VERSIONS table in order to find out how the execution plan then is going to look like:
update (select /*+ FULL(EDV) */ eds.title eds_title,edv.title edv_title from mia_data_staging eds, mia_doc_Versions edv where eds.id = edv.id and eds.title != edv.title) set edv_title = eds_title;or
update /*+ FULL(a.EDV) */ (select eds.title eds_title,edv.title edv_title from mia_data_staging eds, mia_doc_Versions edv where eds.id = edv.id and eds.title != edv.title) a set edv_title = eds_title;Looking at the execution plan of the hinted statement one might get a clue why the optimizer favors an index access path instead.
Regards,
Randolf
Oracle related stuff blog:
http://oracle-randolf.blogspot.com/
SQLTools++ for Oracle (Open source Oracle GUI for Windows):
http://www.sqltools-plusplus.org:7676/
http://sourceforge.net/projects/sqlt-pp/

Query take long time in fetching when used within a procedure

The Database is : Oracle Database 10g Enterprise Edition Release 10.2.0.3.0 - 64bi
Query just takes a second from toad but when used inside a procedure as a cursor it takes takes 3 to 5 minutes.
Following is the Tkprof information when running from procedure.
SELECT CHCLP.CLM_PRVDR_TYPE_LKPCD, CHCLP.PRVDR_LCTN_IID, TO_CHAR
(CHCLP.MODIFIED_DATE, 'MM-dd-yyyy hh24:mi:ss') MODIFIED_DATE,
CHCLP.PRVDR_LCTN_IDENTIFIER, CHCLP.CLM_HDR_CLM_LN_X_PVDR_LCTN_SID
FROM
CLM_HDR_CLM_LN_X_PRVDR_LCTN CHCLP WHERE CHCLP.CLAIM_HEADER_SID = :B1 AND
CHCLP.CLAIM_LINE_SID IS NULL AND CHCLP.IDNTFR_TYPE_CID = 7
call count cpu elapsed disk query current rows
Parse 0 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0
Execute 1 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0
Fetch 1 110.79 247.79 568931 576111 0 3
total 2 110.79 247.79 568931 576111 0 3
Misses in library cache during parse: 0
Optimizer mode: ALL_ROWS
Parsing user id: 93 (CMSAPP) (recursive depth: 1)
Rows     Execution Plan
0 SELECT STATEMENT MODE: ALL_ROWS
0 PARTITION RANGE (SINGLE) PARTITION:KEYKEY
0 TABLE ACCESS MODE: ANALYZED (BY LOCAL INDEX ROWID) OF
'CLM_HDR_CLM_LN_X_PRVDR_LCTN' (TABLE) PARTITION:KEYKEY
0 INDEX MODE: ANALYZED (RANGE SCAN) OF
'XAK1CLM_HDR_CLM_LN_X_PRVDR_LCT' (INDEX (UNIQUE))
PARTITION:KEYKEY
Execution plan when running just the query from TOAD is: (it comes out in a second)
Plan
SELECT STATEMENT ALL_ROWSCost: 6 Bytes: 100 Cardinality: 2
     3 PARTITION RANGE SINGLE Cost: 6 Bytes: 100 Cardinality: 2 Partition #: 1 Partitions accessed #13
          2 TABLE ACCESS BY LOCAL INDEX ROWID TABLE CMSAPP.CLM_HDR_CLM_LN_X_PRVDR_LCTN Cost: 6 Bytes: 100 Cardinality: 2 Partition #: 2 Partitions accessed #13
Why would fetching take such a long time? Please let me know if you need any other information.
Thank You.
Edited by: spur230 on Apr 1, 2009 10:23 AM
Edited by: spur230 on Apr 1, 2009 10:26 AM
Edited by: spur230 on Apr 1, 2009 10:28 AM
Edited by: spur230 on Apr 1, 2009 10:30 AM

Query just takes a second from toad It's possible that the query starts returning rows in a second, but that's not the time required for the entire query.

Query takes longer time to execue

Hi,
I am working on oracle 9.2.0.7.0 installed on HP_UX 11.23.I just installed and created 2 instance in that yesterday.Before i was installing 9.2.0.7, 9.2.0.5 is already installed there and one instance is running in it. when i try to connect any user or execute any query in 9.2.0.7 it is taking quite some time to execute it? May i know what is the reason? how to improve the performance again.
eg:SQL>select * from v$instance;
SQL>conn scott/tiger;
SQL>select * from tab;
even these things take quite some time to execute?
My RAM size is 6GB
swap size is 9 GB
SGA configuration for both instance running in 9.2.0.7 are as follows
SGA_MAX_SIZE=257MB
Shared_pool_size 160MB
Buffer_cache_size 32MB
Java_pool_size 0
large_pool_size 16MB
log_buffer 512K
PGA_AGGREGATE_TARGET 24MB
SGA configuration for instance running in 9.2.0.5 is as follows
SGA_MAX_SIZE=305MB
Shared_pool_size 117MB
Buffer_cache_size 32MB
Java_pool_size 117MB
large_pool_size 16MB
log_buffer 512K
PGA_AGGREGATE_TARGET 24MB
can any one help me in this issue please?

Hi,
you say that "My RAM size is 6GB"
but you have to configure
SGA_MAX_SIZE=257MB
Shared_pool_size 160MB
Buffer_cache_size 32MB
parameters also..
First of all i would increase buffer cache..
You should look in the oracle docs how to configure these params..
Regs,
Acr

Query takes long time for first time

I have a table with 100 million records and another tables with many rows.
When I ran a query - it's takes about 1 minute to complete, but when I ran it again it takes less than 1 second to complete.
Why it is happening?
Thanks,
Tz.

Welcome to the forum.
When you post a question always provide your 4 digit Oracle version. Different versions have different functionality and this can affect your results and the advice you need.
For performance tuning questions see the FAQ (upper right corner of page) for the information needed for tuning requests.
>
When I ran a query
>
How did you run it? Did you use sql*plus, sqldeveloper, some other tool?
What command did you enter?
Using sql*plus you can get an execution plan for the query by
SQL> set serveroutput on
SQL> set autotrace traceonly
SQL> select * from emp;
Execution Plan
Plan hash value: 3956160932
| Id | Operation         | Name | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT |      |    14 |   546 |     3   (0)| 00:00:01 |
|   1 | TABLE ACCESS FULL| EMP |    14 |   546 |     3   (0)| 00:00:01 |
SQL>

Query taking long time

Hi
I have a query in which, its a 3 table join but takes a long time to execute. I had checked with plan table.. it shows one of the table is FULL ACCESS.
I have 2 clarifications.
1. Will the status checking as NULL - (it shouldn't use index)
2. Is the case statements are recommended for queries.
Query
Select .........
FROM CLIENT LEFT OUTER JOIN INTERNET_LOGIN ON INTERNET_LOGIN.NUM_CLIENT_ID=CLIENT.NUM_CLIENT_ID,
POLI_MOT.
WHERE
POLI_MOT.NUM_CLIENT_ID=CLIENT.NUM_CLIENT_ID
AND
(POLI_MOT.CHR_CANCEL_STATUS='N'
OR
POLI_MOT.CHR_CANCEL_STATUS IS NULL)
AND
CLIENT.NUM_CONTACT_TYPE_ID IN (1,3)
AND
(NVL(POLI_MOT.VCH_NEW_IC_NO,'A') =
CASE WHEN (NVL(null,NULL) IS NULL) THEN
NVL(POLI_MOT.VCH_NEW_IC_NO,'A')
ELSE
NVL(null,NULL)
END
OR
POLI_MOT.VCH_OLD_IC_NO =
CASE WHEN nvl(null,null) IS NULL THEN
POLI_MOT.VCH_OLD_IC_NO
ELSE
NVL(null,NULL)
END )
AND POLI_MOT.VCH_POLICY_NO =
CASE WHEN UPPER(nvl(NULL,null)) IS NULL THEN
POLI_MOT.VCH_POLICY_NO
ELSE
NVL(NULL,NULL)
END
AND POLI_MOT.VCH_VEHICLE_NO =
CASE WHEN UPPER(NVL('123',NULL)) IS NULL THEN
POLI_MOT.VCH_VEHICLE_NO
ELSE
NVL('123',NULL)
END

Hi,
There is nothing wrong in having a full table access. When you do the explain plan please check for which table costs you the maximun. try to work on that table.
To tune the performance of your query you can try either indexing or parallel access.
the syntax for parallel index is
/*+ PARALLEL("TBL_NM",100) */(any number)...
for index please use the index name of the table you want to index..
regards
Bharath

Query running long time

hi
I'm having a query running for long time, Im new to dba can any one suggest me methods to make it faster it's running now and i have to make it execute it faster
parallel servers=4, and there are no inactive sessions.
thanks in advance

Make a habit of putting the database version in the post
As i told u before i depends on lot of things not only merge(cartisian ) joins,
1)It depends on the load the database is having,Was this query running fastly before?if it was running fastly then was the workload same as today?
2)Any changes done to database recently or the server?
3)only this query is slow all the queris are slow?
4)When was database last restarted?
5)Are u using bind variable in the query?
6)Is you library cache properly sized?If the query is doing lots of sorts then is your PGA properly sized?
7)Database buffer cache is properly sized?
8)How much memory your database is having?
9)Is your SGA properly fits in your memory or its getting swaped?
Etc...Etc
Check all these things
Regards
Kaunain

My query take long time..

The output of tkprof of my trace file is :
SELECT ENEXT.NUM_PRSN_EMPLY ,ENEXT.COD_BUSUN ,ENEXT.DAT_CALDE ,ENEXT.COD_SHFT
FROM
AAC_EMPLOYEE_ENTRY_EXITS5_VIW ENEXT ,PDS.PDS_EMPLOYEES EMPL ,
PDS.PDS_EMPLOYMENT_TYPES EMPTYP ,PDS.PDS_PAY_CONDITIONS PAYCON WHERE
ENEXT.DAT_CALDE BETWEEN :B6 AND :B5 AND ENEXT.NUM_PRSN_EMPLY IN (SELECT
ATT21 FROM APPS.GLOBAL_TEMPS WHERE ATT1 = 'PRSN') AND ENEXT.NUM_PRSN_EMPLY =
EMPL.NUM_PRSN_EMPLY AND EMPL.EMTYP_COD_EMTYP = EMPTYP.COD_EMTYP AND
EMPTYP.LKP_COD_STA_PAY_EMTYP <> 3 AND
NVL(EMPL.LKP_MNTLY_WITHOUT_ENEXT_EMPLY,2) <> 1 AND EMPL.PCOND_COD_STA_PCOND
= PAYCON.COD_STA_PCOND AND NVL(EMPL.LKP_MNTLY_WITHOUT_ENEXT_EMPLY,2) <> 1
AND PAYCON.LKP_FLG_STA_PAY_PCOND = 1 AND ENEXT.DAT_CALDE >=
EMPL.DAT_EMPLT_EMPLY AND ENEXT.DAT_CALDE <= NVL(EMPL.DAT_DSMSL_EMPLY,
TO_DATE('15001229','YYYYMMDD')) AND 1 = (CASE WHEN
ENEXT.LKP_STA_HOLIDAY_CALNR = 2 AND ENEXT.LKP_CAT_SHFT_SHTAB = 1 AND
ENEXT.TYP_DAY BETWEEN 4 AND 6 THEN 0 WHEN ENEXT.LKP_STA_HOLIDAY_CALNR = 2
AND ENEXT.LKP_CAT_SHFT_SHTAB = 1 AND ENEXT.TYP_DAY NOT BETWEEN 4 AND 6 THEN
1 WHEN ENEXT.LKP_STA_HOLIDAY_CALNR = 2 AND ENEXT.LKP_CAT_SHFT_SHTAB = 2
THEN 0 WHEN ENEXT.LKP_STA_HOLIDAY_CALNR = 1 AND ENEXT.LKP_CAT_SHFT_SHTAB =
1 THEN 1 WHEN ENEXT.LKP_STA_HOLIDAY_CALNR = 1 AND ENEXT.LKP_CAT_SHFT_SHTAB =
2 THEN 0 END) AND ENEXT.LKP_COD_DPUT_BUSUN = NVL(:B4 ,
ENEXT.LKP_COD_DPUT_BUSUN) AND ENEXT.LKP_COD_MANAG_BUSUN = NVL(:B3 ,
ENEXT.LKP_COD_MANAG_BUSUN) AND ENEXT.COD_BUSUN = NVL(:B2 , ENEXT.COD_BUSUN)
AND ENEXT.COD_CAL = NVL(COD_CAL, ENEXT.COD_CAL) AND ENEXT.NUM_PRSN_EMPLY =
NVL(:B1 , ENEXT.NUM_PRSN_EMPLY) AND ENEXT.COD_SHFT IN (SELECT
SHFTBL.COD_SHTAB FROM AAC_SHIFT_TABLES SHFTBL WHERE
SHFTBL.LKP_CAT_SHFT_SHTAB = 1) AND ENEXT.DAT_CALDE NOT IN (SELECT ABN.DAT
FROM APPS.AAC_EMPL_EN_EX_ABNORMAL_VIW ABN WHERE ABN.PRSN =
ENEXT.NUM_PRSN_EMPLY AND ABN.DAT BETWEEN :B6 AND :B5 ) AND ENEXT.DAT_CALDE
IN (SELECT EMPENEXT.DAT_STR_SHFT_ENEXT FROM AAC.AAC_EMPLOYEE_ENTRY_EXITS
EMPENEXT WHERE EMPENEXT.EMPLY_NUM_PRSN_EMPLY = EMPL.NUM_PRSN_EMPLY AND
EMPENEXT.DAT_STR_SHFT_ENEXT BETWEEN :B6 AND :B5 AND
EMPENEXT.LKP_FLG_STA_ENEXT <> 3) ORDER BY ENEXT.NUM_PRSN_EMPLY,
ENEXT.DAT_CALDE
call count cpu elapsed disk query current rows
Parse 2 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0
Execute 2 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0
Fetch 2 40.45 40.30 306 17107740 0 24
total 6 40.45 40.30 306 17107740 0 24
what is wrong in my query?
why it take long time?

user13344656 wrote:
what is wrong in my query?
why it take long time?See PL/SQL forum FAQ
https://forums.oracle.com/forums/ann.jspa?annID=1535
*3. How to improve the performance of my query? / My query is running slow.*
SQL and PL/SQL FAQ
For instructions on what information to post an how to format it.

How to know if executing a query cost long time

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for