Improve the speend of query

I have to select those records that match users' criteria from a table with about 5 million records,
also need to join with other tables, i take too long to execute the query, how can I speed it up?

I got 3 tables, and there relationship is as follow.
Table A:
seqA number (PK)
seqB number
colA varchar
Table B:
seqB number (PK)
rowno number (PK)
colB varchar
Table C:
seqA number
rowno number
colC varchar
Table A and B have more than 5 million records, Table C may has no record. But I need to outer join table c.
my sql is like that:
select a.colA,b.colB, c.colC
from a, b, c
where a.seqA = b.seqB
and a.seqA = c.seqA(+)
and b.rowno = c.rowno(+)
but c can only outer join with one table, how can I make it work and improve the speed???

Similar Messages

Bind variables improve the performence of query??

Hi,
Bind variables improve the performence of program or SQL Query.
Select empno,ename,sal from emp where empno=:eno;
select sal into :vno from emp;
According to these queries i am asking performence of bind variables to learn more from you.
Regards,
Venkat.
Edited by: Venkata2 on Sep 16, 2008 6:40 PM

Karthick_Arp wrote:
any variable inside a stored procedure is a bind variable.
using bind variables can help you avoid hard parse. which leads to performance improvement.
Well, you mentioned pros and I will mention cons. Since bind variable value is not known until execution time optimizer can not select best plan. So Oracle introduced bind variable peeking where plan is deferred until first execution. With bind variable peeking optimizer costructs plan using bind variable values at the first execution. However, if first execution has "not typical" bind variable values we end up with sub-optimal plan.
SY.
P.S. Please do not consider my reply as "we should not use bind variables".

How to improve the query performance in to report level and designer level

How to improve the query performance in to report level and designer level......?
Plz let me know the detail view......

first its all based on the design of the database, universe and the report.
at the universe Level, you have to check your Contexts very well to get the optimal performance of the universe and also your joins, keep your joins with key fields, will give you the best performance.
at the report level, try to make the reports dynamic as much as you can, (Parameters) and so on.
and when you create a paremeter try to get it match with the key fields in the database.
good luck
Amr

How to improve the performance of one program in one select query

Hi,
I am facing performance issue in one program. I have given some part of the code of the program.
it is taking much time below select query. How to improve the performance.
Quick response is highly appreciated.
Program code
DATA: BEGIN OF t_dels_tvpod OCCURS 100,
vbeln LIKE tvpod-vbeln,
posnr LIKE tvpod-posnr,
lfimg_diff LIKE tvpod-lfimg_diff,
calcu LIKE tvpod-calcu,
podmg LIKE tvpod-podmg,
uecha LIKE lips-uecha,
pstyv LIKE lips-pstyv,
xchar LIKE lips-xchar,
grund LIKE tvpod-grund,
END OF t_dels_tvpod,
DATA: l_tabix LIKE sy-tabix,
lt_dels_tvpod LIKE t_dels_tvpod OCCURS 10 WITH HEADER LINE,
ls_dels_tvpod LIKE t_dels_tvpod.
SELECT vbeln INTO TABLE lt_dels_tvpod FROM likp
FOR ALL ENTRIES IN t_dels_tvpod
WHERE vbeln = t_dels_tvpod-vbeln
AND erdat IN s_erdat
AND bldat IN s_bldat
AND podat IN s_podat
AND ernam IN s_ernam
AND kunnr IN s_kunnr
AND vkorg IN s_vkorg
AND vstel IN s_vstel
AND lfart NOT IN r_del_types_exclude.
Waiting for quick response.
Best regards,
BDP

Bansidhar,
1) You need to add a check to make sure that internal table t_dels_tvpod (used in the FOR ALL ENTRIES clause) is not blank. If it is blank skip the SELECt statement.
2) Check the performance with and without clause 'AND lfart NOT IN r_del_types_exclude'. Sometimes NOT causes the select statement to not use the index. Instead of 'lfart NOT IN r_del_types_exclude' use 'lfart IN r_del_types_exclude' and build r_del_types_exclude by using r_del_types_exclude-sign = 'E' instead of 'I'.
3) Make sure that the table used in the FOR ALL ENTRIES clause has unique delivery numbers.
Try doing something like this.
TYPES: BEGIN OF ty_del_types_exclude,
         sign(1)   TYPE c,
         option(2) TYPE c,
         low       TYPE likp-lfart,
         high      TYPE likp-lfart,
       END OF ty_del_types_exclude.
DATA: w_del_types_exclude TYPE          ty_del_types_exclude,
      t_del_types_exclude TYPE TABLE OF ty_del_types_exclude,
      t_dels_tvpod_tmp    LIKE TABLE OF t_dels_tvpod        .
IF NOT t_dels_tvpod[] IS INITIAL.
* Assuming that I would like to exclude delivery types 'LP' and 'LPP'
CLEAR w_del_types_exclude.
REFRESH t_del_types_exclude.
w_del_types_exclude-sign = 'E'.
w_del_types_exclude-option = 'EQ'.
w_del_types_exclude-low = 'LP'.
APPEND w_del_types_exclude TO t_del_types_exclude.
w_del_types_exclude-low = 'LPP'.
APPEND w_del_types_exclude TO t_del_types_exclude.
t_dels_tvpod_tmp[] = t_dels_tvpod[].
SORT t_dels_tvpod_tmp BY vbeln.
DELETE ADJACENT DUPLICATES FROM t_dels_tvpod_tmp
    COMPARING
      vbeln.
SELECT vbeln
    FROM likp
    INTO TABLE lt_dels_tvpod
    FOR ALL ENTRIES IN t_dels_tvpod_tmp
    WHERE vbeln EQ t_dels_tvpod_tmp-vbeln
    AND erdat IN s_erdat
    AND bldat IN s_bldat
    AND podat IN s_podat
    AND ernam IN s_ernam
    AND kunnr IN s_kunnr
    AND vkorg IN s_vkorg
    AND vstel IN s_vstel
    AND lfart IN t_del_types_exclude.
ENDIF.

Need help in improving the performance for the sql query

Thanks in advance for helping me.
I was trying to improve the performance of the below query. I tried the following methods used merge instead of update, used bulk collect / Forall update, used ordered hint, created a temp table and upadated the target table using the same. The methods which I used did not improve any performance. The data count which is updated in the target table is 2 million records and the target table has 15 million records.
Any suggestions or solutions for improving performance are appreciated
SQL query:
update targettable tt
set mnop = 'G',
where ( x,y,z ) in
select a.x, a.y,a.z
from table1 a
where (a.x, a.y,a.z) not in (
select b.x,b.y,b.z
from table2 b
where 'O' = b.defg
and mnop = 'P'
and hijkl = 'UVW';

987981 wrote:
I was trying to improve the performance of the below query. I tried the following methods used merge instead of update, used bulk collect / Forall update, used ordered hint, created a temp table and upadated the target table using the same. The methods which I used did not improve any performance. And that meant what? Surely if you spend all that time and effort to try various approaches, it should mean something? Failures are as important teachers as successes. You need to learn from failures too. :-)
The data count which is updated in the target table is 2 million records and the target table has 15 million records.Tables have rows btw, not records. Database people tend to get upset when rows are called records, as records exist in files and a database is not a mere collection of records and files.
The failure to find a single faster method with the approaches you tried, points to that you do not know what the actual performance problem is. And without knowing the problem, you still went ahead, guns blazing.
The very first step in dealing with any software engineering problem, is to identify the problem. Seeing the symptoms (slow performance) is still a long way from problem identification.
Part of identifying the performance problem, is understanding the workload. Just what does the code task the database to do?
From your comments, it needs to find 2 million rows from 15 million rows. Change these rows. And then write 2 million rows back to disk.
That is not a small workload. Simple example. Let's say that the 2 million row find is 1ms/row and the 2 million row write is also 1ms/row. This means a 66 minute workload. Due to the number of rows, an increase in time/row either way, will potentially have 2 million fold impact.
So where is the performance problem? Time spend finding the 2 million rows (where other tables need to be read, indexes used, etc)? Time spend writing the 2 million rows (where triggers and indexes need to be fired and maintained)? Both?

How to improve the performance of the query

Hi,
Help me by giving tips how to improve the performance of the query. Can I post the query?
Suresh

Below is the formatted query and no wonder it is taking lot of time. Will give you a list of issues soon after analyzing more. Till then understand the pitfalls yourself from this formatted query.
SELECT rt.awb_number,
       ar.activity_id as task_id,
       t.assignee_org_unit_id,
       t.task_type_code,
       ar.request_id
FROM activity_task ar,
     request_task rt,
     task t
WHERE ar.activity_id =t.task_id
AND ar.request_id = rt.request_id
AND ar.complete_status != 'act.stat.closed'
AND t.assignee_org_unit_id in (SELECT org_unit_id
                               FROM org_unit
                               WHERE org_unit_id in (SELECT oo.org_unit_id
                                                     FROM org_unit oo
                                                     WHERE oo.org_unit_id='3'
                                                     OR oo.parent_id ='3'
                               OR parent_id in (SELECT oo.org_unit_id
                                                FROM org_unit oo
                                                WHERE oo.org_unit_id='3'
                                                OR oo.parent_id ='3'
                               AND has_queue=1
AND ar.parent_task_id not in (SELECT tt.task_id
                              FROM task tt
                              WHERE tt.assignee_org_unit_id in (SELECT org_unit_id
                                                                FROM org_unit
                                                                WHERE org_unit_id in (SELECT oo.org_unit_id
                                                                                      FROM org_unit oo
                                                                                      WHERE oo.org_unit_id='3'
                                                                                      OR oo.parent_id ='3'
                                                                 OR parent_id in (SELECT oo.org_unit_id
                                                                                  FROM org_unit oo
                                                                                  WHERE oo.org_unit_id='3'
                                                                                  OR oo.parent_id ='3'
                                                                 AND has_queue=1
AND rt.awb_number is not null
ORDER BY rt.awb_numberCheers
Sarma.

HI All, How to improve the performance in given query?

HI All,
How to improve the performance in given query?
Query is..
PARAMETERS : p_vbeln type lips-vbeln.
DATA : par_charg TYPE LIPS-CHARG,
par_werks TYPE LIPS-WERKS,
PAR_MBLNR TYPE MSEG-MBLNR .
SELECT SINGLE charg
werks
INTO (par_charg, par_werks)
FROM lips
WHERE vbeln = p_vbeln.
IF par_charg IS NOT INITIAL.
SELECT single max( mblnr )
INTO par_mblnr
FROM mseg
WHERE bwart EQ '101'
AND werks EQ par_werks (index on werks only)
AND charg EQ par_charg.
ENDIF.
Regards
Steve

Hi steve,
Can't you use the material in your query (and not only the batch)?
I am assuming your system has an index MSEG~M by MANDT + MATNR + WERKS (+ other fields). Depending on your system (how many different materials you have), this will probably speed up the query considerably.
Anyway, in our system we ended up by creating an index by CHARG, but leave as a last option, only if selecting by matnr and werks is not good enough for your scenario.
Hope this helps,
Rui Dantas

Inner Join. How to improve the performance of inner join query

Inner Join. How to improve the performance of inner join query.
Query is :
select f1~ablbelnr
         f1~gernr
         f1~equnr
         f1~zwnummer
         f1~adat
         f1~atim
         f1~v_zwstand
         f1~n_zwstand
         f1~aktiv
         f1~adatsoll
         f1~pruefzahl
         f1~ablstat
         f1~pruefpkt
         f1~popcode
         f1~erdat
         f1~istablart
         f2~anlage
         f2~ablesgr
         f2~abrdats
         f2~ableinh
            from eabl as f1
            inner join eablg as f2
            on f1ablbelnr = f2ablbelnr
            into corresponding fields of table it_list
            where f1~ablstat in s_mrstat
            %_HINTS ORACLE 'USE_NL (T_00 T_01) index(T_01 "EABLG~0")'.
I wanted to modify the query, since its taking lot of time to load the data.
Please suggest : -
Treat this is very urgent.

Hi Shyamal,
In your program , you are using "into corresponding fields of ".
Try not to use this addition in your select query.
Instead, just use "into table it_list".
As an example,
Just give a normal query using "into corresponding fields of" in a program. Now go to se30 ( Runtime analysis), and give the program name and execute it .
Now if you click on Analyze button , you can see, the analysis given for the query.The one given in "Red" line informs you that you need to find for alternate methods.
On the other hand, if you are using "into table itab", it will give you an entirely different analysis.
So try not to give "into corresponding fields" in your query.
Regards,
SP.

Please help me how to improve the performance of this query further.

Hi All,
Please help me how to improve the performance of this query further.
Thanks.

Hi,
this is not your first SQL tuning request in this community -- you really should learn how to obtain performance diagnostics.
The information you posted is not nearly enough to even start troubleshooting the query -- you haven't specified elapsed time, I/O, or the actual number of rows the query returns.
The only piece of information we have is saying that your query executes within a second. If we believe this, then your query doesn't need tuning. If we don't, then we throw it away
and we're left with nothing.
Start by reading this blog post: Kyle Hailey &raquo; Power of DISPLAY_CURSOR
and applying this knowledge to your case.
Best regards,
Nikolay

Ways to improve the performance of my query?

Hi all,
I have created a multi provider which enables to fetch the data from 3 ods. And each ods contains huge amount of data. As a result my query performance is very slow..
apart from creating indexes on ods? is there any other to be carried out to improve the performance of my query. Since all the 3 info providers are ods.
thanxs
haritha

Haritha,
If you still need more info, just have a look below:
There are few ways your queries can be improved:
1. Your Data volume in your InfoProviders.
2. Dim table, how you have manage your objects into your dim table.
3. Query that runs from multiprovider vs cube itself. when running from multiproviders at the time of execution the system has to create more tables hence the query performance will be affected.
4. Aggregates into the cube, and they perfection of designing the aggregates.
5. OLAPCHACHE
6. Calculation formula
etc.
and also you can go thru the links below:
https://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/servlet/prt/portal/prtroot/docs/library/uuid/cccad390-0201-0010-5093-fd9ec8157802
https://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/servlet/prt/portal/prtroot/docs/library/uuid/ce7fb368-0601-0010-64ba-fadc985a1f94
https://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/servlet/prt/portal/prtroot/docs/library/uuid/c8c4d794-0501-0010-a693-918a17e663cc
Hope this helps you.
****Assign Points*******
Gattu

To improve the query???

Example:
select money,sum(total),sum(amount),sum(credit), sum(total_im), sum(total_am)
from account group by money;
The problem is: The function sum -> because "TABLE ACCESS FULL" of the table account.
How to improve the query? Without to create an index for each column (sum).
Regards.

user9331221 wrote:
How to improve the query?There is not much room for improvement. The select statement has to compute those five aggregates. It cannot do that without reading the entire table. So a TABLE ACCESS FULL is almost necessary. The only option (besides Keith's materialized view suggestion) is to create an index on (money,total,amount,credit,total_im,total_am) in which case this statement can do a full index scan. But this is only advantageous for your query when the table contains lots of other columns that make the table relatively big compared to the index. And the obvious disadvantage is that you now have an extra index to maintain during DML.
Regards,
Rob.
Edited by: Rob van Wijk on 9-sep-2010 13:34

Please guide to improve the performance of XML column reading query.

Hi Experts,
The below query is taking 45 seconds to return 170 records.
Due to selecting XMLTYPE column in query.
select *
from RANGE where WSNO = 3
order by PREFERENCE desc;
The total number of records in the table is 1060.
Even it's a very small table why it's taking 45 seconds.
Can anybody please help me on how to get the output in 2 to 3 seconds.
I want all the columns from the table.
The problem only with REST column XMLTYPE.
If I am not selecting this column I am getting output in 1 to 2 seconds.
I am posting the execution plan and DDL for table and index.
PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
Plan hash value: 3593186720
| SNO | Operation                    | EMPNAME                   | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT             |                        |    31 | 23281 |    21   (5)| 00:00:01 |
|   1 | SORT ORDER BY               |                        |    31 | 23281 |    21   (5)| 00:00:01 |
|   2 |   TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID | RANGE                 |    31 | 23281 |    20   (0)| 00:00:01 |
|* 3 |    INDEX RANGE SCAN          | INDX_WSNO              |    31 |       |     1   (0)| 00:00:01 |
Predicate Information (SNOentified by operation SNO):
   3 - access("WSNO"=3)
CREATE TABLE RANGE
SNO                              NUMBER,
BUSNO                            NUMBER,
EMPNAME                          NVARCHAR2(64),
PREFERENCE                       NUMBER,
TSNO                             NUMBER,
MEMBER                          CHAR(1 CHAR) ,
EQU                             CHAR(1 CHAR) ,
REMAIL                          CHAR(1 CHAR) ,
SSR                             CHAR(1 CHAR) ,
SUB                             CHAR(1 CHAR) ,
SPN                             CHAR(1 CHAR) ,
SEMPNAME                        NVARCHAR2(128),
FVL                             NUMBER(32),
TVL                             NUMBER(32),
ISD                             CHAR(1 CHAR),
CHANGED                         NVARCHAR2(64),
CDATE                           TIMESTAMP(6) ,
UDBY                            NVARCHAR2(64),
UDATE                           TIMESTAMP(6),
LSTU                            CLOB,
WSNO                            NUMBER,
ASTN                            CHAR(1 CHAR),
ASTNPL                          CHAR(1 CHAR),
AVAF                            CHAR(1 CHAR),
REST                            SYS.XMLTYPE
TABLESPACE USERS
PCTUSED    0
PCTFREE    10
INITRANS   11
MAXTRANS   255
STORAGE    (
            INITIAL          64K
            NEXT             1M
            MINEXTENTS       1
            MAXEXTENTS       UNLIMITED
            PCTINCREASE      0
            BUFFER_POOL      DEFAULT
XMLTYPE REST STORE AS CLOB
      ( TABLESPACE USERS
        ENABLE      STORAGE IN ROW
        CHUNK       8192
        PCTVERSION 10
        NOCACHE
        INDEX       (
          TABLESPACE USERS
          STORAGE    (
                      INITIAL          64K
                      NEXT             1
                      MINEXTENTS       1
                      MAXEXTENTS       UNLIMITED
                      PCTINCREASE      0
                      BUFFER_POOL      DEFAULT
        STORAGE    (
                    INITIAL          64K
                    NEXT             1M
                    MINEXTENTS       1
                    MAXEXTENTS       UNLIMITED
                    PCTINCREASE      0
                    BUFFER_POOL      DEFAULT
LOB (LSTU) STORE AS
      ( TABLESPACE USERS
        ENABLE      STORAGE IN ROW
        CHUNK       8192
        RETENTION
        NOCACHE
        INDEX       (
          TABLESPACE USERS
          STORAGE    (
                      INITIAL          64K
                      NEXT             1
                      MINEXTENTS       1
                      MAXEXTENTS       UNLIMITED
                      PCTINCREASE      0
                      BUFFER_POOL      DEFAULT
        STORAGE    (
                    INITIAL          64K
                    NEXT             1M
                    MINEXTENTS       1
                    MAXEXTENTS       UNLIMITED
                    PCTINCREASE      0
                    BUFFER_POOL      DEFAULT
NOCACHE
NOPARALLEL
MONITORING;
CREATE INDEX INDX_WSNO ON RANGE(WSNO);
CREATE UNIQUE INDEX RULE_EMPNAME ON RANGE(BUSNO, EMPNAME);
Please help me how to improve the performance of this query.
Thanks.

Can you try something like this and check if its faster? (this is just my guess as I dont have your data )
SELECT SNO,
       BUSNO,
       EMPNAME,
       PREFERENCE,
       TSNO,
       MEMBER,
       EQU,
       REMAIL,
       SSR,
       SUB,
       SPN,
       SEMPNAME,
       FVL,
       TVL,
       ISD,
       CHANGED,
       CDATE,
       UDBY,
       UDATE,
       LSTU,
       WSNO,
       ASTN,
       ASTNPL,
       AVAF,
       xmltype.getclobval (rest) rest
FROM RANGE
WHERE wsno = 3
order by PREFERENCE desc;
Cheers,
Manik.

How to improve the query performance

ALTER PROCEDURE [SPNAME]
@Portfolio INT,
@Program INT,
@Project INT
AS
BEGIN
--DECLARE @StartDate DATETIME
--DECLARE @EndDate DATETIME
--SET @StartDate = '11/01/2013'
--SET @EndDate = '02/28/2014'
IF OBJECT_ID('tempdb..#Dates') IS NOT NULL
DROP TABLE #Dates
IF OBJECT_ID('tempdb..#DailyTasks') IS NOT NULL
DROP TABLE #DailyTasks
CREATE TABLE #Dates(WorkDate DATE)
--CREATE INDEX IDX_Dates ON #Dates(WorkDate)
;WITH Dates AS
SELECT (@StartDate) DateValue
UNION ALL
SELECT DateValue + 1
FROM Dates
WHERE DateValue + 1 <= @EndDate
INSERT INTO #Dates
SELECT DateValue
FROM Dates D
LEFT JOIN tb_Holidays H
ON H.HolidayOn = D.DateValue
AND H.OfficeID = 2
WHERE DATEPART(dw,DateValue) NOT IN (1,7)
AND H.UID IS NULL
OPTION(MAXRECURSION 0)
SELECT TSK.TaskID,
TR.ResourceID,
WC.WorkDayCount,
(TSK.EstimateHrs/WC.WorkDayCount) EstimateHours,
D.WorkDate,
TSK.ProjectID,
RES.ResourceName
INTO #DailyTasks
FROM Tasks TSK
INNER JOIN TasksResource TR
ON TSK.TaskID = TR.TaskID
INNER JOIN tb_Resource RES
ON TR.ResourceID=RES.UID
OUTER APPLY (SELECT COUNT(*) WorkDayCount
FROM #Dates
WHERE WorkDate BETWEEN TSK.StartDate AND TSK.EndDate)WC
INNER JOIN #Dates D
ON WorkDate BETWEEN TSK.StartDate AND TSK.EndDate
-------WHERE TSK.ProjectID = @Project-----
SELECT D.ResourceID,
D.WorkDayCount,
SUM(D.EstimateHours/D.WorkDayCount) EstimateHours,
D.WorkDate,
T.TaskID,
D.ResourceName
FROM #DailyTasks D
OUTER APPLY (SELECT (SELECT CAST(TaskID AS VARCHAR(255))+ ','
FROM #DailyTasks DA
WHERE D.WorkDate = DA.WorkDate
AND D.ResourceID = DA.ResourceID
FOR XML PATH('')) AS TaskID) T
LEFT JOIN tb_Project PRJ
ON D.ProjectID=PRJ.UID
INNER JOIN tb_Program PR
ON PRJ.ProgramID=PR.UID
INNER JOIN tb_Portfolio PF
ON PR.PortfolioID=PF.UID
WHERE (@Portfolio = -1 or PF.UID = @Portfolio)
AND (@Program = -1 or PR.UID = @Program)
AND (@Project = -1 or PRJ.UID = @Project)
GROUP BY D.ResourceID,
D.WorkDate,
T.TaskID,
D.WorkDayCount,
D.ResourceName
HAVING SUM(D.EstimateHours/D.WorkDayCount) > 8
hi..
My SP is as above..
I connected this SP to dataset in SSRS report..as per my logic..Portfolio contains many Programs and Program contains many Projects.
When i selected the ALL value for parameters Program and Project..i'm unable to get output.
but when i select values for all 3 parameters i'm getting output. i took default values for paramters also.
so i commented the where condition in SP as shown above
--------where TSK.ProjectID=@Project-------------
now i'm getting output when selecting ALL value for parameters.
but here the issue is performance..it takes 10sec to retrieve for single project when i'm executing the sp.
how can i create index on temp table in this sp and how can i improve the query performance..
please help.
thanks in advance..
lucky

Didnt i provide you solution in other thread?
ALTER PROCEDURE [SPNAME]
@Portfolio INT,
@Program INT,
@Project INT
AS
BEGIN
--DECLARE @StartDate DATETIME
--DECLARE @EndDate DATETIME
--SET @StartDate = '11/01/2013'
--SET @EndDate = '02/28/2014'
IF OBJECT_ID('tempdb..#Dates') IS NOT NULL
DROP TABLE #Dates
IF OBJECT_ID('tempdb..#DailyTasks') IS NOT NULL
DROP TABLE #DailyTasks
CREATE TABLE #Dates(WorkDate DATE)
--CREATE INDEX IDX_Dates ON #Dates(WorkDate)
;WITH Dates AS
SELECT (@StartDate) DateValue
UNION ALL
SELECT DateValue + 1
FROM Dates
WHERE DateValue + 1 <= @EndDate
INSERT INTO #Dates
SELECT DateValue
FROM Dates D
LEFT JOIN tb_Holidays H
ON H.HolidayOn = D.DateValue
AND H.OfficeID = 2
WHERE DATEPART(dw,DateValue) NOT IN (1,7)
AND H.UID IS NULL
OPTION(MAXRECURSION 0)
SELECT TSK.TaskID,
TR.ResourceID,
WC.WorkDayCount,
(TSK.EstimateHrs/WC.WorkDayCount) EstimateHours,
D.WorkDate,
TSK.ProjectID,
RES.ResourceName
INTO #DailyTasks
FROM Tasks TSK
INNER JOIN TasksResource TR
ON TSK.TaskID = TR.TaskID
INNER JOIN tb_Resource RES
ON TR.ResourceID=RES.UID
OUTER APPLY (SELECT COUNT(*) WorkDayCount
FROM #Dates
WHERE WorkDate BETWEEN TSK.StartDate AND TSK.EndDate)WC
INNER JOIN #Dates D
ON WorkDate BETWEEN TSK.StartDate AND TSK.EndDate
WHERE (TSK.ProjectID = @Project OR @Project = -1)
SELECT D.ResourceID,
D.WorkDayCount,
SUM(D.EstimateHours/D.WorkDayCount) EstimateHours,
D.WorkDate,
T.TaskID,
D.ResourceName
FROM #DailyTasks D
OUTER APPLY (SELECT (SELECT CAST(TaskID AS VARCHAR(255))+ ','
FROM #DailyTasks DA
WHERE D.WorkDate = DA.WorkDate
AND D.ResourceID = DA.ResourceID
FOR XML PATH('')) AS TaskID) T
LEFT JOIN tb_Project PRJ
ON D.ProjectID=PRJ.UID
INNER JOIN tb_Program PR
ON PRJ.ProgramID=PR.UID
INNER JOIN tb_Portfolio PF
ON PR.PortfolioID=PF.UID
WHERE (@Portfolio = -1 or PF.UID = @Portfolio)
AND (@Program = -1 or PR.UID = @Program)
AND (@Project = -1 or PRJ.UID = @Project)
GROUP BY D.ResourceID,
D.WorkDate,
T.TaskID,
D.WorkDayCount,
D.ResourceName
HAVING SUM(D.EstimateHours/D.WorkDayCount) > 8
Please Mark This As Answer if it helps to solve the issue Visakh ---------------------------- http://visakhm.blogspot.com/ https://www.facebook.com/VmBlogs

Improve the query's performance

Hi Guys,
I'm an Oracle beginner and I'm getting the following issue:
I have to run a query with a join between two tables, let me say A and B.
The table A has 10 Milions of records (800MB) and is indexed on two columns (a1 and a2).
The table B has 100000 records (64MB) no index.
The query is:
select
A.a1,
A.a2,
B.b1
from A,B
where A.a1 >= B.b1 and A.a2<=B.b1
The problem is that it is really slow (more that 1 day) although the execution plan used is NESTED LOOPS.
How can I improve the performance of this query?
Please help me,
GF

Hi Guys,
First of all thank you very much for your prompt response.
devmiral your advise could help me. I have just realized that the statistic have never been updated.
I'll try to update it and let you know.
Eric here is an quick example:
Table A Table B
a2 a1 a3 b1
10 14 1 10
15 16 2 11
18 19 3 15
20 21 4
The query is:
select
A.a2,
A.a1,
A.a3,
B.b1
from A,B
where A.a1 >= B.b1 and A.a2<=B.b1
The output expected should be:
a2 a1 a3 b1
10 14 1 10
10 14 1 11
15 16 2 15
Thank you
GF

Improve the query performance

Hi, I need help for improving query performance..
I have a query in which i am joining 2 tables, join after some aggregation. Both table has more than 50 million record.
There is no index created on these table,both tables are loaded after truncation. So is it required to create index on this table before joining? The query status was showing 'suspended' since it was running for long time. For temporary purpose, i just executed
the query multiple times by changing month filter each times.
How can i improve this instead of adding month filter and running multiple times

Hi Nikkred,
According to your description, you are joining 2 table which contain more than 50 million records. Now what you want is improving query performance, right?
Query tuning is not an easy task. Basically it depends on three factors: your degree of knowledge, the query itself and the amount of optimization required. So in your scenario, you can post your detail query, so that you can get more help. Besides, you
can create index on your table which can improve the performance. Here are some links about performance tuning tips for you reference.
http://www.mssqltips.com/sql-server-tip-category/9/performance-tuning/
http://www.infoworld.com/d/data-management/7-performance-tips-faster-sql-queries-262
Regards,
Charlie Liao
TechNet Community Support

Improve the speend of query

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for