MDX query Running slow in SSRS than in SSMS

Hi,
I have a SSRS report which takes 37 secs to execute a single MDX query whereas the same query takes less than 1 sec in SSMS.
I tried removing the parameters and hardcoding default values, still it takes same time. I also tried using OLE DB data source which also takes same time.
Please help.

Hi Purush,
According to your description, the query execute time in SQL Server Management Studio (SSMS) takes less than that in SQL Server Reporting Services (SSRS) report, right? As per my understanding, this is normal phenomenon. Because when we run a query on the
query designer of the report, first we need pass the query to database, then execute the query and then return the result to query designer. So this 1 second can the time that used to pass the query to database and return the result.
Hope this helps.
Regards,
Charlie Liao
TechNet Community Support

Similar Messages

Query of query - running slower on 64 bit CF than 32 bit CF

Greetings...
I am seeing behavior where pages that use query-of-query run slower on 64-bit Coldfusion 9.01 than on 32-bit Coldfusion 9.01.
My server specs are : dual processer virtual machine, 4 GIG ram, Windows 2008 Datacenter Server r2 64-bit, Coldfusion 9.01. Note that the coldfusion is literally "straight out of the box", and is using all default settings - the only thing I configured in CF is a single datasource.
The script I am using to benchmark this runs a query that returns 20,000 rows with fields id, firstname, lastname, email, city, datecreated. I then loop through all 20,000 records, and for each record, I do a query-of-query (on the same master query) to find any other record where the lastname matches that of the record I'm currently on. Note that I'm only interested in using this process for comparative benchmarking purposes, and I know that the process could be written more efficiently.
Here are my observed execution times for both 64-bit and 32-bit Coldfusion (in seconds) on the same machine.
64 bit CF 9.01: 63,49,52,52,52,48,50,49,54 (avg=52 seconds)
32 bit CF 9.01: 47,45,43,43,45,41,44,42,46 (avg=44 seconds)
It appears from this that 64-bit CF performs worse than 32-bit CF when doing query-of-query operations. Has anyone made similar observations, and is there any way I can tune the environment to improve 64 bit performance?
Thanks for any help you can provide!
By the way, here's the code that is generating these results:

<CFQUERY NAME="ALLRECS" DATASOURCE="MyDsn">
    SELECT * FROM MyTBL
</CFQUERY>
<CFLOOP QUERY="ALLRECS">
    <CFQUERY NAME="SAMELASTNAME" DBTYPE="QUERY">
        SELECT * FROM ALLRECS
        WHERE LN=<CFQUERYPARAM VALUE="#ALLRECS.LN#" CFSQLTYPE="CF_SQL_VARCHAR">
        AND ID<><CFQUERYPARAM VALUE="#AllRecs.ID#" CFSQLTYPE="CF_SQL_INTEGER">
    </CFQUERY>
    <CFIF SameLastName.RecordCount GT 20>
        #AllRecs.LN#, #AllRecs.FN# : #SameLastName.RecordCount# other records with same lastname<BR>
    </CFIF>
</CFLOOP>

BoBear2681 wrote:
..follow-up: ..Thanks for the follow-up. I'll be interested to hear the progress (or otherwise, as the case may be).
As an aside. I got sick of trying to deal with Clip because it could only handle very small Clip sizes. AFAIR it was 1 second of 44.1 KHz stereo. From that point, I developed BigClip.
Unfortunately BigClip as it stands is even less able to fulfil your functional requirement than Clip, in that only one BigClip can be playing at a time. Further, it can be blocked by other sound applications (e.g. VLC Media Player, Flash in a web page..) or vice-versa.

Query runs slower when using variables & faster when using hard coded value

Hi,
My query runs slower when i use variables but it runs faster when i use hard coded values. Why it is behaving like this ?
My query is in cursor definition in a procedure. Procedure runs faster when using hard coded valus and slower when using variables.
Can anybody help me out there?
Thanks in advance.

Hi,
Thanks for ur reply.
here is my code with Variables:
Procedure populateCountryTrafficDetails(pWeekStartDate IN Date , pCountry IN d_geography.country_code%TYPE) is
startdate date;
AR_OrgId number(10);
Cursor cTraffic is
Select
          l.actual_date, nvl(o.city||o.zipcode,'Undefined') Site,
          g.country_code,d.customer_name, d.customer_number,t.contrno bcn,
          nvl(r.dest_level3,'Undefined'),
          Decode(p.Product_code,'820','821','821','821','801') Product_Code ,
          Decode(p.Product_code,'820','Colt Voice Connect','821','Colt Voice Connect','Colt Voice Line') DProduct,
          sum(f.duration),
          sum(f.debamount_eur)
          from d_calendar_date l,
          d_geography g,
          d_customer d, d_contract t, d_subscriber s,
          d_retail_dest r, d_product p,
          CPS_ORDER_DETAILS o,
          f_retail_revenue f
          where
          l.date_key = f.call_date_key and
          g.geography_key = f.geography_key and
          r.dest_key = f.dest_key and
          p.product_key = f.product_key and
          --c.customer_key = f.customer_key and
          d.customer_key = f.customer_key and
          t.contract_key = f.contract_key and
          s.SUBSCRIBER_KEY = f.SUBSCRIBER_KEY and
          o.org_id(+) = AR_OrgId and
          g.country_code = pCountry and
          l.actual_date >= startdate and
          l.actual_date <= (startdate + 90) and
          o.cli(+) = s.area_subno and
          p.product_code in ('800','801','802','804','820','821')
          group by
          l.actual_date,
          o.city||o.zipcode, g.country_code,d.customer_name, d.customer_number,t.contrno,r.dest_level3, p.product_code;
Type CountryTabType is Table of country_traffic_details.Country%Type index by BINARY_INTEGER;
Type CallDateTabType is Table of country_traffic_details.CALL_DATE%Type index by BINARY_INTEGER;
Type CustomerNameTabType is Table of Country_traffic_details.Customer_name%Type index by BINARY_INTEGER;
Type CustomerNumberTabType is Table of Country_traffic_details.Customer_number%Type index by BINARY_INTEGER;
Type BcnTabType is Table of Country_traffic_details.Bcn%Type index by BINARY_INTEGER;
Type DestinationTypeTabType is Table of Country_traffic_details.DESTINATION_TYPE%Type index by BINARY_INTEGER;
Type ProductCodeTabType is Table of Country_traffic_details.Product_Code%Type index by BINARY_INTEGER;
Type ProductTabType is Table of Country_traffic_details.Product%Type index by BINARY_INTEGER;
Type DurationTabType is Table of Country_traffic_details.Duration%Type index by BINARY_INTEGER;
Type DebamounteurTabType is Table of Country_traffic_details.DEBAMOUNTEUR%Type index by BINARY_INTEGER;
Type SiteTabType is Table of Country_traffic_details.Site%Type index by BINARY_INTEGER;
CountryArr CountryTabType;
CallDateArr CallDateTabType;
Customer_NameArr CustomerNameTabType;
CustomerNumberArr CustomerNumberTabType;
BCNArr BCNTabType;
DESTINATION_TYPEArr DESTINATIONTYPETabType;
PRODUCT_CODEArr PRODUCTCODETabType;
PRODUCTArr PRODUCTTabType;
DurationArr DurationTabType;
DebamounteurArr DebamounteurTabType;
SiteArr SiteTabType;
Begin
     startdate := (trunc(pWeekStartDate) + 6) - 90;
     Exe_Pos := 1;
     Execute Immediate 'Truncate table country_traffic_details';
     dropIndexes('country_traffic_details');
     Exe_Pos := 2;
     /* Set org ID's as per AR */
     case (pCountry)
     when 'FR' then AR_OrgId := 81;
     when 'AT' then AR_OrgId := 125;
     when 'CH' then AR_OrgId := 126;
     when 'DE' then AR_OrgId := 127;
     when 'ES' then AR_OrgId := 123;
     when 'IT' then AR_OrgId := 122;
     when 'PT' then AR_OrgId := 124;
     when 'BE' then AR_OrgId := 132;
     when 'IE' then AR_OrgId := 128;
     when 'DK' then AR_OrgId := 133;
     when 'NL' then AR_OrgId := 129;
     when 'SE' then AR_OrgId := 130;
     when 'UK' then AR_OrgId := 131;
     else raise_application_error (-20003, 'No such Country Code Exists.');
     end case;
     Exe_Pos := 3;
dbms_output.put_line('3: '||to_char(sysdate, 'HH24:MI:SS'));
     populateOrderDetails(AR_OrgId);
dbms_output.put_line('4: '||to_char(sysdate, 'HH24:MI:SS'));
     Exe_Pos := 4;
     Open cTraffic;
     Loop
     Exe_Pos := 5;
     CallDateArr.delete;
FETCH cTraffic BULK COLLECT
          INTO CallDateArr, SiteArr, CountryArr, Customer_NameArr,CustomerNumberArr,
          BCNArr,DESTINATION_TYPEArr,PRODUCT_CODEArr, PRODUCTArr, DurationArr, DebamounteurArr LIMIT arraySize;
          EXIT WHEN CallDateArr.first IS NULL;
               Exe_pos := 6;
                    FORALL i IN 1..callDateArr.last
                    insert into country_traffic_details
                    values(CallDateArr(i), CountryArr(i), Customer_NameArr(i),CustomerNumberArr(i),
                    BCNArr(i),DESTINATION_TYPEArr(i),PRODUCT_CODEArr(i), PRODUCTArr(i), DurationArr(i),
                    DebamounteurArr(i), SiteArr(i));
                    Exe_pos := 7;
dbms_output.put_line('7: '||to_char(sysdate, 'HH24:MI:SS'));
     EXIT WHEN ctraffic%NOTFOUND;
END LOOP;
     commit;
Exe_Pos := 8;
          commit;
dbms_output.put_line('8: '||to_char(sysdate, 'HH24:MI:SS'));
          lSql := 'CREATE INDEX COUNTRY_TRAFFIC_DETAILS_CUSTNO ON country_traffic_details (CUSTOMER_NUMBER)';
          execDDl(lSql);
          lSql := 'CREATE INDEX COUNTRY_TRAFFIC_DETAILS_BCN ON country_traffic_details (BCN)';
          execDDl(lSql);
          lSql := 'CREATE INDEX COUNTRY_TRAFFIC_DETAILS_PRODCD ON country_traffic_details (PRODUCT_CODE)';
          execDDl(lSql);
          lSql := 'CREATE INDEX COUNTRY_TRAFFIC_DETAILS_SITE ON country_traffic_details (SITE)';
          execDDl(lSql);
          lSql := 'CREATE INDEX COUNTRY_TRAFFIC_DETAILS_DESTYP ON country_traffic_details (DESTINATION_TYPE)';
          execDDl(lSql);
          Exe_Pos:= 9;
dbms_output.put_line('9: '||to_char(sysdate, 'HH24:MI:SS'));
Exception
     When Others then
     raise_application_error(-20003, 'Error in populateCountryTrafficDetails at Position: '||Exe_Pos||' The Error is '||SQLERRM);
End populateCountryTrafficDetails;
In the above procedure if i substitute the values with hard coded values i.e. AR_orgid = 123 & pcountry = 'Austria' then it runs faster.
Please let me know why it is so ?
Thanks in advance.

MDX Query Desinger Slow to Respond on a WAN

We are seeing the MDX Designer take a long time to open and to select filters. Running a Query is fast, but selecting filters from dimension members that only have 2 to 10 members can take up to a minute to display and the same is true when dragging
the member into the Filter pane. Executing the query is not an issue and the returned results even 1000's of rows is fairly quick.
raym

Hi rayishome,
According to your description, when you using multiple parameters in Filter in MDX Query Designer, it takes long time to execute the query. Right?
In this scenario, I want to know the version of SSRS you are using. It has reported similar issue in SSRS 2008, and this issue has been released in both SQL 2008 SP1 and SQL 2008 R2. Please refer to link below:
SSRS BIDS Query Designer very slow when using multiple parameters
Also please refer to a blog below:
Speeding up the Query Parameters Dialog in the SSRS Query Designer
Best Regards,
Simon Hou
TechNet Community Support

MDX Query much slower for users without administrativ rights

We have a SQL 2012 SP1 with CU9 installed and run a MDX query against a Cube. The Problem is that the query runs very slow for a user without administrativ persmission on the cube. With admin rights it takes 3 seconds and without 30 seconds. I can't find
any error in the query so maybe someone can pin point me in the right direction.The Role has all reading information it needs.
This is the Query:
SELECT NON EMPTY { [Measures].[Blocked Consignment], [Measures].[Consignment in Inspection],
[Measures].[Restricted Consignment], [Measures].[Unrestricted Consignment] } ON COLUMNS, NON EMPTY
{ ([Date].[Date].[Date].ALLMEMBERS * [Materials].[Part Number].[Part Number].ALLMEMBERS *
[Materials].[Key].[Key].ALLMEMBERS * [Sold To].[Name].[Name].ALLMEMBERS *
[Stock Information].[Plant - Storage Location].[Storage Location].ALLMEMBERS * [Non Zero].[Zero Stock Status].[Zero Stock Status].ALLMEMBERS ) }
ON ROWS
FROM ( SELECT ( STRTOSET("[Non Zero].[Zero Stock Status].&[No]", CONSTRAINED) )
ON COLUMNS FROM ( SELECT ( STRTOSET("[Stock Information].[Storage Location].&[1090]", CONSTRAINED) )
ON COLUMNS FROM ( SELECT ( STRTOSET("[Stock Information].[Plant].&[1090]", CONSTRAINED) )
ON COLUMNS FROM ( SELECT ( STRTOSET("[Sold To].[Name].[All]", CONSTRAINED) )
ON COLUMNS FROM [Stock Snapshot]))))
WHERE ( IIF( STRTOSET("[Stock Information].[Plant].&[1090]", CONSTRAINED).Count = 1, STRTOSET("[Stock Information].[Plant].&[1090]", CONSTRAINED), [Stock Information].[Plant].currentmember ),
IIF( STRTOSET("[Stock Information].[Storage Location].&[1090]", CONSTRAINED).Count = 1, STRTOSET("[Stock Information].[Storage Location].&[1090]", CONSTRAINED), [Stock Information].[Storage Location].currentmember ) )
Any one came across this is or is it a bug?

Can you check which build of SSAS you've got installed? It looks similar to this bug:
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2905298/en-us
Apart from that, if you have used cell security in your role, it would be expected that query performance would be slower for users of that role.
Chris
Check out my MS BI blog I also do
SSAS, PowerPivot, MDX and DAX consultancy
and run public SQL Server and BI training courses in the UK

Query Running Slow due to nvl.

I have a Cursor Based query written as a Procedure.when i invoke that procedure,I found that two condition statements are the ones which is making my query run very slow.
Since this has been handled with NVL statements query is running very slow.Currently query takes more than one hour to execute.if i comment these two statements and run the query,it takes ony 20 secs to complete.
Those two statements are
'and rbsa.batch_source_id = nvl(p_source_type_id, rbsa.batch_source_id)'
'and rsa.salesrep_id between nvl(p_from_salesrep_id, rsa.salesrep_id) and nvl(p_to_salesrep_id, rsa.salesrep_id)'
Is there any other alternative to replace these two statements by other means.
Thanks in Advance...

Dear Friend,
Please try to replace nvl(p_source_type_id, rbsa.batch_source_id) with decode(p_source_type_id,NULL,rbsa.batch_source_id,p_source_type_id)
It will speedup your query.
Regards
Ahamed Rafeeque Cherkala

MDX query runs on SQL but does not populate 'Measures' in Powerpivot

I ran MDX query on SQL 2012 for looking the products and their shipping status
The code is given below:
WITH
set Date1 AS
strtomember( "[Time].[2014].[Q4].[2014-Jun].[" +format(now()-2, "MM") + "/"+format(now()-2, "dd") + "/" +format(now()-2, "yyyy") + "]")
set Item1 as
{ [Item].[ItemID].ALLMEMBERS}
SELECT NON EMPTY { [Measures].[Shipped Qty], [Measures].[Shipped Amt], [Measures].[Ordered Qty], [Measures].[Ordered Amt] }
ON COLUMNS,
Date1*[Item1] ON ROWS FROM [ABCD]
WHERE (
[Channel].&[OL],
[Geography].&[A.9])
The query gives desired output when run in SQL. But when I run the same query in while pulling data in PowerPivot, Dimensions i.e. Date and Item are populated but measures were not populated. Can anyone please help me understand how to populated Measures
in PowerPivot?

Hi apoorv,
It was hard to reproduce this issue on my test environment. I would suggest you try to use a simple MDX query to check if it will retrun the correct measures data. Please see the screenshot below:
In addition, you can also create a SQL Server Analysis Services trace to capture some events for furhter investigation.
Use SQL Server Profiler to Monitor Analysis Services:http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms174946.aspx
Hope this helps.
Elvis Long
TechNet Community Support

Query running slow

Below query is running slow is there any other way to write the query which will enhance the performance.
select ld.cst_fle_seq,
     tf.date_pro,
     lj.case_num ,
     ca.reference,
     rr.rej_txt
from
     load_judg lj,
     rej_rea rr ,
     pl_case ca,
     tp_files tf ,
     tp tp
where rr.rej_code(+) = ld.rej_code
and ca.case_num (+)=lj.case_num
and tp.seq =tf.seq
and lj.cred_code(+) =tp.cst_code
and tp.format =9
and valid=''Y''
and tf.fle_name like ''%F%''
and lj.rej_code is not null
and trunc(date_pro)=trunc(sysdate)
Thanks in advance
Jha

Here is the explan plan of the query
- SELECT STATEMENT Optimizer=CHOOSE (Cost=16 Card=1 Bytes=225)
-NESTED LOOPS (Cost=16 Card=1 Bytes=225)
-NESTED LOOPS (OUTER) (Cost=15 Card=1 Bytes=192)
- HASH JOIN (Cost=14 Card=1 Bytes=147)
- MERGE JOIN (CARTESIAN) (Cost=9 Card=4 Bytes=432)
-TABLE ACCESS (FULL) OF LOAD_JUDGMENTS (Cost=1 Card=1 Bytes=69)
- SORT (JOIN)
-TABLE ACCESS (FULL) OF TAPE_FILES
-TABLE ACCESS (FULL) OF TAPES (Cost=4 Card=418 Bytes=16302)
-TABLE ACCESS (BY ROWID) OF REJECT_REASONS
-INDEX (UNIQUE SCAN) OF REJ_PK (UNIQUE)
-TABLE ACCESS (BY ROWID) OF CASES
-INDEX (UNIQUE SCAN) OF CASE_PK (UNIQUE)
sorry, as I have checked the tables and its not a cartesian.
Thanks
Jha

Query running slow after 1000 rows in oracle

Hi.
I have one query which is fetching miln of rows.. the query runs very fast till 1000 to 1500 records after that it run very slow. Can you please help ,what could be the reason?
Thanks

831269 wrote:
I have one query which is fetching miln of rows.. Why are you fetching that many rows? What is your client code going to do with a million rows? And why do you expect this to be fast? A million rows worth of I/O has to be done by Oracle (that will likely be mostly from disk and not buffer cache). That million rows has to be copied from the Oracle's SGA to client memory. If your client is PL/SQL code, that will be copied into the PGA. If your client is external, then that copy has to happen across platform boundaries and the network too.
Then your code churns away on processing a million rows... doing what exactly? That "+what+" will need to be done once per row, for a million times. If it takes 10ms per row, that means almost 3h of client processing time.
Fetching that many rows..? Often a design and coding mistake. Always an exception to the rule. Will never be "fast".
And scalability and performance need to be addressed by re-examining the requirements, optimising the design that necessitates fetching that many rows, and using techniques such as parallel processing and thread safe code design.

Query Runs Slow in Forms

I have a search query that uses the substr function to fetch some records.The query runs fine when executing SQL*PLUS or any other client like PL/SQL Developer. The same query is dead slow in Forms interface.
Can anyone suggest?

Both the query use the substr function. Here is the query. only highlighted IF condition evaluates to true.
     V_SEARCH VARCHAR2(255);
BEGIN
     --- SET MOBILENO
     IF :CONTROL.MOBILENO IS NOT NULL AND LENGTH(:CONTROL.MOBILENO) <= 7 THEN
          IF :CONTROL.QRY_MOBILENO = 'P' THEN
               V_SEARCH := V_SEARCH||' AND substr(MOBILENO,5,7) = '||''''||:CONTROL.MOBILENO||'''';
          ELSIF :CONTROL.QRY_MOBILENO = 'S' THEN
               V_SEARCH := V_SEARCH||' AND substr(MOBILENO,5,7) LIKE '||''''||:CONTROL.MOBILENO||'%''';
          ELSIF :CONTROL.QRY_MOBILENO = 'E' THEN
               V_SEARCH := V_SEARCH||' AND substr(MOBILENO,5,7) LIKE '||'''%'||:CONTROL.MOBILENO||'''';
          ELSIF :CONTROL.QRY_MOBILENO = 'C' THEN
               V_SEARCH := V_SEARCH||' AND substr(MOBILENO,5,7) LIKE '||'''%'||:CONTROL.MOBILENO||'%''';
          END IF;
     ELSIF :CONTROL.MOBILENO IS NOT NULL AND LENGTH(:CONTROL.MOBILENO) <= 11 THEN
          IF :CONTROL.QRY_MOBILENO = 'P' THEN
               V_SEARCH := V_SEARCH||' AND MOBILENO = '||''''||:CONTROL.MOBILENO||'''';
          ELSIF :CONTROL.QRY_MOBILENO = 'S' THEN
               V_SEARCH := V_SEARCH||' AND MOBILENO LIKE '||''''||:CONTROL.MOBILENO||'%''';
          ELSIF :CONTROL.QRY_MOBILENO = 'E' THEN
               V_SEARCH := V_SEARCH||' AND MOBILENO LIKE '||'''%'||:CONTROL.MOBILENO||'''';
          ELSIF :CONTROL.QRY_MOBILENO = 'C' THEN
               V_SEARCH := V_SEARCH||' AND MOBILENO LIKE '||'''%'||:CONTROL.MOBILENO||'%''';
          END IF;
     END IF;
     --NDC
     IF :CONTROL.NDC IS NOT NULL THEN
               V_SEARCH := V_SEARCH||' AND SUBSTR(MOBILENO,1,4) = '||''''||:CONTROL.NDC||'''';
     END IF;
     --Number Type
     IF :CONTROL.number_type IS NOT NULL THEN
               V_SEARCH := V_SEARCH||' AND number_type = '||''''||:CONTROL.number_type||'''';
     END IF;
     --Status
     IF :CONTROL.status IS NOT NULL THEN
               V_SEARCH := V_SEARCH||' AND status = '||''''||substr(:CONTROL.status,1,1)||'''';
     END IF;
     --CITY
     IF :CONTROL.CITY IS NOT NULL THEN
               V_SEARCH := V_SEARCH||' AND LOC_NAME = '||''''||:CONTROL.CITY||'''';
     END IF;
     --REGION
     IF :CONTROL.REGION IS NOT NULL THEN
               V_SEARCH := V_SEARCH||' AND COMM_REGION = '||''''||:CONTROL.REGION||'''';
     END IF;
     --RECYCLE FLAG
     IF :CONTROL.RECYCLE_FLAG <> 'A' THEN
          V_SEARCH := V_SEARCH||' AND RECYCLE_FLAG = '||''''||:CONTROL.RECYCLE_FLAG||'''';
     END IF;
     --EXECUTE QUERY
     V_SEARCH := SUBSTR(V_SEARCH,5);
GO_BLOCK('NO_INVENTORY');
     SET_BLOCK_PROPERTY('NO_INVENTORY',ONETIME_WHERE,V_SEARCH);
     EXECUTE_QUERY;
END;

Sql query runs slower from the application

Hi,
We are using oracle 9ias on AIX box.The jdk version used: 1.3.1 . From the j2ee application when we perfom a search, the sql query takes for ever to return the results. I know that we are waiting on the database because I can see the query working when I look at TOAD.But if i run the same query on the database server itself, it returns the results in less than a sec. Could you guys throw some light on how we could troubleshoot this problem. Thanks.

When the results have to travel over the network, it is slow, and when they don't, it is fast.
That is what you are saying, correct?
So your approach should be to not bring so much data over the network. Don't select columns you don't need, and don't select rows you don't need.

Query running slow after upgrading

Hi,
We have one query that is running very slow in the 10.2.0.4 database after upgrading from 9.2.0.8 HP-UX B11.31. In 9.2.0.8 database it used to take 5 mins. But in the new 10.2.0.4 database it takes around 36 mins.The query is given below.
SELECT a.transaction_date,
                a.ORD_PROD_BE_ID,
                a.SLS_POSTD_DT_BE_ID,
                 a.net_trd_amt,
                a.trd_actl_un_qty,
                t.FISC_MO_CD,
                t.FY_CD
FROM fact_net_trd_sls a,
            dim_tm_mv t,
            dim_prod b,
            (SELECT DISTINCT kit_prod_cd FROM kal_kit_bom) c
WHERE b.be_id = a.ORD_PROD_BE_ID
AND b.end_date >SYSDATE
AND t.be_id = a.SLS_POSTD_DT_BE_ID
AND t.end_date > SYSDATE
AND c.kit_prod_cd (+)= b.base_prod_cd
AND t.FY_CD IN (SELECT DISTINCT FY_CD FROM DIM_tm_MV T WHERe T.DAY_STRT_PRD_OF_TM=TRUNC(SYSDATE))
and nvl2(c.kit_prod_cd,'K','FG') = 'FG'
ORDER BY a.ORD_PROD_BE_ID,a.TRANSACTION_DATE;The plan in 9i is below,
PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
| Id | Operation                           | Name                  | Rows | Bytes |TempSpc| Cost |
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT                    |                        | 2861K| 1585M|       |   170K|
|   1 | VIEW                               |                        | 2861K| 1585M|       |   170K|
|   2 |   SORT UNIQUE                       |                        | 2861K|   654M| 1397M|   170K|
|* 3 |    FILTER                           |                        |       |       |       |       |
|* 4 |     HASH JOIN OUTER                 |                        |       |       |       |       |
|* 5 |      HASH JOIN                      |                        | 1998K|   445M| 4056K| 63419 |
|* 6 |       TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID   | DIM_PROD               | 53189 | 3428K|       |   283 |
|   7 |        BITMAP CONVERSION TO ROWIDS |                        |       |       |       |       |
|   8 |         BITMAP INDEX FULL SCAN      | XN3_DIM_PROD           |       |       |       |       |
|   9 |       TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID   | FACT_NET_TRD_SLS       | 4081 |   203K|       |   118 |
| 10 |        NESTED LOOPS                 |                        | 1998K|   320M|       | 57607 |
|* 11 |         HASH JOIN SEMI              |                        |   490 | 57330 |       |   208 |
|* 12 |          TABLE ACCESS FULL          | DIM_TM_MV              | 15180 | 1260K|       |   195 |
| 13 |          TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID| DIM_TM_MV              |     1 |    32 |       |     1 |
|* 14 |           INDEX RANGE SCAN          | XN4_DIM_TM_MV          |     1 |       |       |     1 |
|* 15 |         INDEX RANGE SCAN            | FACT_NET_TRD_SLS_IDX3 | 4081 |       |       |    54 |
| 16 |      TABLE ACCESS FULL              | KAL_KIT_BOM            | 14175 | 85050 |       |    24 |
Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
   3 - filter(NVL2("KAL_KIT_BOM"."KIT_PROD_CD",'K','FG')='FG')
   4 - access("B"."BASE_PROD_CD"=("KAL_KIT_BOM"."KIT_PROD_CD"(+)))
   5 - access("B"."BE_ID"="A"."ORD_PROD_BE_ID")
   6 - filter("B"."END_DATE">SYSDATE@!)
11 - access("SYS_ALIAS_0000"."FY_CD"="T"."FY_CD")
12 - filter("SYS_ALIAS_0000"."END_DATE">SYSDATE@!)
14 - access("T"."DAY_STRT_PRD_OF_TM"=TRUNC(SYSDATE@!))
15 - access("SYS_ALIAS_0000"."BE_ID"="A"."SLS_POSTD_DT_BE_ID")
Note: cpu costing is off
36 rows selected.The plan in 10g is below.
Operation           Object Name     Rows     Bytes     Cost       Object Node      In/Out PStart    PStop
SELECT STATEMENT Optimizer Mode=ALL_ROWS                             34                           1382
VIEW                   34           19 K        1382
    SORT UNIQUE                               34           7 K          1382
      FILTER
        HASH JOIN OUTER                   34           7 K          1375
          MAT_VIEW ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID           WHSUSR.DIM_TM_MV 1              81           1
            NESTED LOOPS                      24           5 K          1350
              NESTED LOOPS                    740         105 K     1336
                MERGE JOIN CARTESIAN                              1              95           1332
                  TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID              WHSUSR.DIM_PROD      52 K        3 M        279
                    BITMAP CONVERSION TO ROWIDS
                      BITMAP INDEX FULL SCAN     WHSUSR.XN3_DIM_PROD
                  BUFFER SORT                   1              30           9223372036 G
                    SORT UNIQUE                               1              30           1
                      MAT_VIEW ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID               WHSUSR.DIM_TM_MV 1              30           1
                        INDEX RANGE SCAN               WHSUSR.XN4_DIM_TM_MV      1                              1
                TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID                TRANSDATA.FACT_NET_TRD_SLS             740         36 K        4
                  INDEX RANGE SCAN     TRANSDATA.FACT_NET_TRD_SLS_IDX2 2 K                         1
              INDEX RANGE SCAN         WHSUSR.XN1_DIM_TM_MV      1                              1
          TABLE ACCESS FULL               EDW_DBA.KAL_KIT_BOM            14 K        83 K        24                                                            We have checked that the statistics are uptodate. Please help with suggestions.
Thanks in advane.

Most likely, the index stats are not up-to-date, please double check.
h5. In 9i, FACT_NET_TRD_SLS_IDX3 is used to scan the fact.
Time dimension is used to filter out most records in fact table first, then join to Product dimension.
h5. In 10g, FACT_NET_TRD_SLS_IDX2 is used to scan the fact.
Time dimension "MERGE JOIN CARTESIAN" to Product dimension first to form a data set, and then use it to filter the fact table.
If the stats for FACT_NET_TRD_SLS_IDX2 let ORACLE believe that much less records will remain/survive after the join, 10g will use it.
It seems to me that cartesian join Time x Product is going to generate a much bigger data set than estimated, then the nested loop after that will take a long time to iterate through.
Why don't you partition your fact table BY RANGE(SLS_POSTD_DT_BE_ID) to make it simpler?

Spatial query runs slow on view

Hello,
I have two tables and one of them has geometry column. I created view to join those two tables based on id column which has been indexed for both tables.
t1(
id number(9),
name varchar2(20)
t2(
id number(9),
geom MDSYS.SDO_GEOMETRY
CREATE VIEW v1 (
id,
name,
geom
) AS
SELECT /*+ FIRST_ROWS */ t1.id, t1.name, t2.geom
FROM t1,t2
WHERE t1.id = t2.id
When I query the view with following statement it runs very slow (there are more then 1 million rows in t2 table)
SELECT * FROM v1
WHERE mdsys.sdo_filter(geom, [a rectangle],'querytype=window') = 'TRUE';
but
SELECT /*+ FIRST_ROWS */ t1.id, t1.name,t2.geom
FROM t1,t2
WHERE t1.id=t2.id
and mdsys.sdo_filter(geom, [a rectangle],'querytype=window') = 'TRUE';
returns almost instantly. Can some one tell me what is wrong with the "create view" statement?
Thanks

Thank you for your reply. Here are the plans. The view looks for the spatial index first.
| Id | Operation | Name | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)|
| 0 | SELECT STATEMENT | | 21 | 756 | 10 (60)|
| 1 | NESTED LOOPS | | 21 | 756 | 10 (60)|
| 2 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID| T2 | 5269 | 123K| 3 (0)|
| 3 | DOMAIN INDEX | T2_SDX | | | |
| 4 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID| T1 | | | |
| 5 | INDEX RANGE SCAN | T1_ID_IDX | 1 | | 0 (0)|
| Id | Operation | Name | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)|
| 0 | SELECT STATEMENT | | 21 | 756 | 99 (3)|
| 1 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID | T2 | 1 | 24 | 99 (3)|
| 2 | NESTED LOOPS | | 21 | 756 | 99 (3)|
| 3 | TABLE ACCESS FULL | T1 | 21 | 252 | 2 (0)|
| 4 | BITMAP CONVERSION TO ROWIDS | | | | |
| 5 | BITMAP AND | | | | |
| 6 | BITMAP CONVERSION FROM ROWIDS| | | | |
| 7 | INDEX RANGE SCAN | T2_ID_IDX | 1 | | 2 (0)|
| 8 | BITMAP CONVERSION FROM ROWIDS| | | | |
| 9 | SORT ORDER BY | | | | |
| 10 | DOMAIN INDEX | T2_SDX | 1 | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Query running slow in one node

Hi All,
We are running 4-node Oracle 10g RAC (linux 64-bit). The query is running fast in one node, but the same query is running very slow in the other node. And sometimes, we see pin S wait on X wait event in top 5 events.
Has anyone faced this kind of situation before ?
Thanks,
Kumar

Hi,
Execute your query on node where query is running very slow. Get SID and execute query above to see what is event of waiting.
exec dbms_application_info.set_client_info('@sw2')
-- file sw2.sql
col event format     a25 heading "Wait Event" trunc
col state format     a15 heading "Wait State" trunc
col siw    format   99999 heading "Waited So|Far (ms)"
col wt     format 9999999 heading "Time Waited|(ms)"
select event,
       state,
       seconds_in_wait siw,
       wait_time wt
from   v$session_wait
where sid = &sid
order by event;
exec dbms_application_info.set_client_info('@sw1');
-- file sw1.sql
set linesize 30000
set pagesize 200
col sid      format    9999 heading "SID"
col username format     a10 heading "USERNAME"
col osuser   format     a20 heading "OSUSER"
col event    format     a25 heading "Wait Event" trunc
col state    format     a15 heading "Wait State" trunc
col siw      format   99999 heading "Waited So|Far (ms)"
col wt       format 9999999 heading "Time Waited|(ms)"
col sw1      format 9999999 heading "File"
col sw2      format 9999999 heading "Block"
col Objeto   format a50
select sw.event,
       sw.p1,
       sw.p2,
       sw.p3,
       sw.state,
       s.sid,
       S.osuser,
       s.username,
       nvl(s.program, s.module),
       sw.seconds_in_wait siw,
       sw.wait_time wt
from gv$session_wait sw,
       gv$session s
WHERE sw.sid = s.sid
   and sw.EVENT NOT LIKE 'SQL%'
   and username is not NULL
   and s.inst_id = sw.inst_id
   and sw.event not like 'PX%'
order by 1, 6, 7;Regards,
Levi Pereira

Query runs slower in function

Why is it that a query takes more than 15 seconds to run in a function, but only one second when run separately in a query editor window in Toad? Here's the query, where piSiteID, piProtocolID, DrugType1 and DrugType2 are all parameters and v_drug_packs_dispensable is a view that loads almost instantly. I have added all the necessary indexes (or at least I think so).
SELECT MIN(DRUG_EXPIRE_DT) INTO ExpDate
FROM V_DRUG_PACKS_DISPENSABLE dp
WHERE SITE_ID = piSiteID
AND PROTOCOL_ID = piProtocolID
and drug_type_id = DrugType1 or drug_type_id = DrugType2;
If you take this same function and put it in an Editor window and fill in the parameters, it executes immediately.

Toadthat's the answer.... Toad tends to only show the first x rows, try to get the last row in Toad and you'll notice it takes more time (comparable to the function). Toad does a first-rows optimalization.

MDX query Running slow in SSRS than in SSMS

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for