Merge join issue
hi all,
In my project am using table type varibale as paramter with the columns of id salary to the table. In my procedure i have used merge join with the passed table type variable with the existing table.Insert the value given id does not match,update the value
to the id if matched this is the condition to my merge join. I passed the below table as parameter. Every id is new so i passed the id as -1. My problem is, when i insert the below table with my procedure it is not maintainig order. For example during insert
600 should be first,300 should be second and 800 should be third row, but am not getting like that it always save ascending order 300,600,800 respectively. Am i facing this issue since am using merge join?if so can any one help me to maintain order during
insert.
My table type variable paramter value has been given below
id salary
-1 600
-1 300
-1 800
For example during insert 600 should be first,300 should be second and 800 should be third row,
Can you tell me on what's the rule that determines the order of insertion?
Please Mark This As Answer if it solved your issue
Please Vote This As Helpful if it helps to solve your issue
Visakh
My Wiki User Page
My MSDN Page
My Personal Blog
My Facebook Page
Similar Messages
-
Group by causing merge join cartesian?
Hi All,
Database Version: Oracle Database 10g Enterprise Edition Release 10.2.0.5.0 - 64bi
Database Version: PL/SQL Release 10.2.0.5.0 - ProductionI've written a query which runs in under a second and produces a few hundred rows (as you can see below). I only wanted to find the number of distinct incident ID's returned so I put a group by at the end and it ran for ever.
I produced an explain plan (as shown below) for the query with the group by in it and it is trying to perform a cartesian join!
WTF is going on? I've never known a group by statement to do that before.
basic structure of the tables is as follows:
SQL> desc answer_master
Name Null? Type
ANSWER_ID NOT NULL NUMBER(12)
INCIDENT_ID NOT NULL NUMBER(12)
PLAN_ID NOT NULL NUMBER(12)
QUESTION_ID NOT NULL NUMBER(12)
SQL> desc question_master
Name Null? Type
QUESTION_PLAN_ID NOT NULL NUMBER(12)
QUESTION_ID NOT NULL NUMBER(12)
QUESTION_TYPE NOT NULL NUMBER(2)
QUESTION_TEXT NOT NULL VARCHAR2(255)
QUESTION_PARENT_ID NUMBER(12)the offending SQL statement
SQL> explain plan for
2 select incident_id
3 from answer_master am
4 where exists (select 'x'
5 from answer_master am1
6 where question_id in (select question_id
7 from question_master qms
8 where question_plan_id = 1477
9 and question_parent_id = 69067
10 and substr(question_text,-3) = 'PDF')
11 and am1.incident_id = am.incident_id)
12 and exists (select 'x'
13 from answer_master am1
14 where question_id in (select question_id
15 from question_master qms
16 where question_plan_id = 1477
17 and question_parent_id = 69067
18 and substr(question_text,-3) != 'PDF')
19 and am1.incident_id = am.incident_id);
Explained.
Elapsed: 00:00:00.01
SQL> set linesize 132;
SQL> select plan_table_output from table(dbms_xplan.display('plan_table',null,'serial'));
PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
Plan hash value: 1710257923
| Id | Operation | Name | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time |
| 0 | SELECT STATEMENT | | 1 | 32 | 171 (6)| 00:00:01 |
|* 1 | HASH JOIN RIGHT SEMI | | 1 | 32 | 171 (6)| 00:00:01 |
| 2 | VIEW | VW_SQ_2 | 71 | 923 | 70 (5)| 00:00:01 |
| 3 | NESTED LOOPS | | 71 | 3266 | 70 (5)| 00:00:01 |
|* 4 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID | QUESTION_MASTER | 1 | 35 | 2 (0)| 00:00:01 |
|* 5 | INDEX RANGE SCAN | QUESTION_MASTER_IX1 | 3 | | 1 (0)| 00:00:01 |
|* 6 | INDEX RANGE SCAN | ANSWER_MASTER_QID_IX2 | 18731 | 201K| 68 (5)| 00:00:01 |
| 7 | NESTED LOOPS | | 304 | 5776 | 100 (5)| 00:00:01 |
| 8 | VIEW | VW_SQ_1 | 14 | 182 | 70 (5)| 00:00:01 |
| 9 | HASH UNIQUE | | 14 | 644 | | |
| 10 | NESTED LOOPS | | 14 | 644 | 70 (5)| 00:00:01 |
|* 11 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID| QUESTION_MASTER | 1 | 35 | 2 (0)| 00:00:01 |
|* 12 | INDEX RANGE SCAN | QUESTION_MASTER_IX1 | 3 | | 1 (0)| 00:00:01 |
|* 13 | INDEX RANGE SCAN | ANSWER_MASTER_QID_IX2 | 18731 | 201K| 68 (5)| 00:00:01 |
|* 14 | INDEX RANGE SCAN | ANSWER_MASTER_QID_IX3 | 22 | 132 | 2 (0)| 00:00:01 |
Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
1 - access("ITEM_2"="AM"."INCIDENT_ID")
4 - filter("QUESTION_PLAN_ID"=1477 AND SUBSTR("QUESTION_TEXT",-3)!='PDF')
5 - access("QUESTION_PARENT_ID"=69067)
6 - access("QUESTION_ID"="QUESTION_ID")
11 - filter("QUESTION_PLAN_ID"=1477 AND SUBSTR("QUESTION_TEXT",-3)='PDF')
12 - access("QUESTION_PARENT_ID"=69067)
13 - access("QUESTION_ID"="QUESTION_ID")
14 - access("ITEM_1"="AM"."INCIDENT_ID")
33 rows selected.
Elapsed: 00:00:00.06
SQL> explain plan for
2 select incident_id
3 from answer_master am
4 where exists (select 'x'
5 from answer_master am1
6 where question_id in (select question_id
7 from question_master qms
8 where question_plan_id = 1477
9 and question_parent_id = 69067
10 and substr(question_text,-3) = 'PDF')
11 and am1.incident_id = am.incident_id)
12 and exists (select 'x'
13 from answer_master am1
14 where question_id in (select question_id
15 from question_master qms
16 where question_plan_id = 1477
17 and question_parent_id = 69067
18 and substr(question_text,-3) != 'PDF')
19 and am1.incident_id = am.incident_id)
20 group by incident_id;
Explained.
Elapsed: 00:00:00.00
SQL> select plan_table_output from table(dbms_xplan.display('plan_table',null,'serial'));
PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
Plan hash value: 1433543102
| Id | Operation | Name | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time |
| 0 | SELECT STATEMENT | | 1 | 98 | 77 (6)| 00:00:01 |
| 1 | HASH GROUP BY | | 1 | 98 | 77 (6)| 00:00:01 |
| 2 | NESTED LOOPS | | 1 | 98 | 76 (4)| 00:00:01 |
| 3 | NESTED LOOPS | | 1 | 87 | 74 (5)| 00:00:01 |
| 4 | NESTED LOOPS | | 1 | 81 | 72 (5)| 00:00:01 |
| 5 | MERGE JOIN CARTESIAN | | 1 | 70 | 4 (0)| 00:00:01 |
|* 6 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID | QUESTION_MASTER | 1 | 35 | 2 (0)| 00:00:01 |
|* 7 | INDEX RANGE SCAN | QUESTION_MASTER_IX1 | 3 | | 1 (0)| 00:00:01 |
| 8 | BUFFER SORT | | 1 | 35 | 2 (0)| 00:00:01 |
|* 9 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID| QUESTION_MASTER | 1 | 35 | 2 (0)| 00:00:01 |
|* 10 | INDEX RANGE SCAN | QUESTION_MASTER_IX1 | 3 | | 1 (0)| 00:00:01 |
|* 11 | INDEX RANGE SCAN | ANSWER_MASTER_QID_IX2 | 18731 | 201K| 68 (5)| 00:00:01 |
|* 12 | INDEX RANGE SCAN | ANSWER_MASTER_QID_IX3 | 22 | 132 | 2 (0)| 00:00:01 |
|* 13 | INDEX RANGE SCAN | ANSWER_MASTER_QID_IX2 | 1 | 11 | 2 (0)| 00:00:01 |
Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
6 - filter("QUESTION_PLAN_ID"=1477 AND SUBSTR("QUESTION_TEXT",-3)='PDF')
7 - access("QUESTION_PARENT_ID"=69067)
9 - filter("QUESTION_PLAN_ID"=1477 AND SUBSTR("QUESTION_TEXT",-3)!='PDF')
10 - access("QUESTION_PARENT_ID"=69067)
11 - access("QUESTION_ID"="QUESTION_ID")
12 - access("AM1"."INCIDENT_ID"="AM"."INCIDENT_ID")
13 - access("QUESTION_ID"="QUESTION_ID" AND "AM1"."INCIDENT_ID"="AM"."INCIDENT_ID")
31 rows selected.
Elapsed: 00:00:00.00
SQL> spool offedit: changing greater-than/less-than signs to != so it displays on forum
Edited by: WhiteHat on Feb 11, 2011 9:37 AMThe "Cartesian" product is nothing "wrong", if (!) the optimizer is right and the number or rows it's picking for that part of the execution plan is really 1. And that can be true, as ORACLE also changed from HASH join to NL. So that NL might be the cause of your performance issue not the Cartesian.
The performance of IN, EXISTS and SUBQUERIES got better over the versions, but I still see no reason in most cases to use them for good readable and performing code.
What you do think about this:
WITH my_selection As
(SELECT incident_id
from question_master qms
where question_plan_id = 1477
and question_parent_id = 69067
and (substr(question_text,-3) = 'PDF'
or and substr(question_text,-3) != 'PDF')
GROUP BY incident_id
HAVING COUNT(*) >1)
SELECT am.incident_id
FROM answer_master am
INNER JOIN my_selection s
ON am.incident_id = s.incident_id
group by am.incident_id; -
Merge Join Cartesian performing bad on 10g
Hello All,
I have a merge join cartesian query that took seconds in 8i. Once the database was upgraded to 10g, the same query is taking hours. In looking at the explain plans, it looks like the access paths are identical.
Has anyone encountered this issue?
Thanks.Sometimes the cost-based optimizer will do cartesian joins to optimize a query. Seeing the word "cartesian" in a query plan is still a major red flag to my eyes. Also, performance changes between versions are usually expected, though most people complain about 9i to 10g results these days :)
Are you sure you need to be doing a cartesian join at all? As Fly pointed out they have a bad reputation, and yours must be running badly as per your post. I personally get more efficient results from hash joins over sort merges these days so that's something you can look at.
Try variations on your query to generate execution plans to see if you can get better results. Don't forget to actually time results since plan statistics have been known to be out-of-touch with actual run performance.
Good luck! -
Can someone post an example query and explain query plan that makes use of a Merge Join in Oracle? Naturally, a description of the data would also be appreciated. I'm just trying to better understand when the Oracle optimizer will choose a merge join over other options, and would like to see some examples. This means that the query posted must naturally choose the merge join (forcing a merge join with query hints is no good).
-JacobFor example during insert 600 should be first,300 should be second and 800 should be third row,
Can you tell me on what's the rule that determines the order of insertion?
Please Mark This As Answer if it solved your issue
Please Vote This As Helpful if it helps to solve your issue
Visakh
My Wiki User Page
My MSDN Page
My Personal Blog
My Facebook Page -
Why does Merge Join needs its sources to be sorted
Hi,
Can anyone explain why Merge Join needs its sources to be sorted ?
I saw an explanation in another thread that this is the way to not load all the data to memory, but isnt the data that is about to be merged already all in memory becuase the SORT component waits for all the rows to arrive ?
Why are there no options for Full cache, Partial Cache and No Cache like in the Lookup component ?MERGE Join is one of Join algorithms in SQL Server needs sorted inputs and efficient for large set of records.
You may refer the below(Craig
Freedman) link to understand the MERGE JOIN algorithm in details.
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/craigfr/archive/2006/08/03/merge-join.aspx
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms137653.aspx
Nope
This is SSIS forum and I guess poster is asking about MERGE JOIN transformation in SSIS
Please Mark This As Answer if it helps to solve the issue Visakh ---------------------------- http://visakhm.blogspot.com/ https://www.facebook.com/VmBlogs -
WHERE clauses and Merge Join Cartesian?
For some reason, Siebel is generating queries like this:
AND CONCAT (CONCAT (t41828.lvl8anc_postn, '-'),
t41828.lvl8_emp_full_name
) = 'GEO-SMITH, BILL'
AND CONCAT (CONCAT (t41828.lvl6anc_postn, '-'),
t41828.lvl6_emp_full_name
) = 'GROUP1-DOE, JOHN'and this ends up with 3 merge join cartesian in autotrace and this query takes several hours.
However, by rewriting just those 2 clauses to:
AND (t41828.lvl8anc_postn = 'GEO' and
t41828.lvl8_emp_full_name = 'SMITH, BILL')
AND (t41828.lvl6anc_postn = 'GROUP1' and
t41828.lvl6_emp_full_name = 'DOE, JOHN')the merge join cartesians go away, and it runs in 7 seconds.
However, since Siebel is generating the query, and we are having issues, we decided to add columns for testing that is equivalent to the concatenation of the two columns above. After doing this, and creating indexes on the new columns, it is now back to the merge join cartesian and I cannot get rid of it.
So:
1. How can rewriting the WHERE (not adding or deleting anything here, just rewriting it in a different way) clause eliminate the merge join cartesian?
I'm guessing by understanding that single question, I will be able to come up with a better solution to this.Note we made two additional columns:
CONCAT (CONCAT (t41828.lvl8anc_postn, '-'), t41828.lvl8_emp_full_name) => col1 CONCAT (CONCAT (t41828.lvl6anc_postn, '-'), t41828.lvl6_emp_full_name) => col2
When I created indexes on col1 and col2 and used them in the query, the cartesians returned, and I cannot figure out why. So, I'm still confused why:
In the original query:
1. Using CONCAT, and thus no indexes => cartesian
2. No CONCAT, and indexes => no cartesian
With the new columns, col1 and col2:
1. No CONCAT needed, full table scan or indexes => cartesian -
Role of left input and right input in merge join
Hi All
I really appreciate if someone explain me the difference between left input and right input in Merge Join.Think it in terms of transact sql join statement. The left input and right input represents the left and right part of join operation. So depending on type of operation chosen like LEFT JOIN,INNER JOIN etc it takes correspondig input as the base input and
does join operation with the other input. Also it relies upon order of records in input which is why its essential that data should be sorted and also Issorted property must be tru for both the inputs.
The real significance of choice is for left join as it will take left input as base table and does the comparison with other input returning all records from base input irrespective of whether or not it found a match. In all other cases (INNER/FULL JOIN)
it gives similar output regardless of the which input you choose as left or right input.
Please Mark This As Answer if it helps to solve the issue Visakh ---------------------------- http://visakhm.blogspot.com/ https://www.facebook.com/VmBlogs -
We have 3 WLC's(5500) in our network and about 150 AP's. Only 4 AP's register to 1 controller, over 70 to 2nd and about 50 to 3rd. On checking & comparing few of the AP's this is what i concluded.
1. 4 AP's that registered to the first WLC did not have that AP in the primary, secondary or tertiary list. If it was there then it was either secondary or tertiary or the device name entered is not resolvable by DNS but the device name is correct. Management IP was not configured on any of the 4 AP's for any of the WLC's
2. AP's registered to second and third WLC's have similar config. First WLC as Primary, Second as secondary and third Tertiary with correct DNS name in the field but wrong device name. Also all have Management IP's entered as well.
CAPWAP Join Taken Time for 4 AP's varies from 6to10 mins while for other AP its few seconds. DNS for cisco-capwap-controller points to WLC with4 AP's. I donot see any use of option in DNS for WAP's.
How can i make AP's join this WLC.
Should I get the DNS and device name discrepancy corrected?
What is the selection process for AP's to choose WLC, as I see AP's not joining WLC in there building but joining a WLC in other adjacent building? Is there a way for me to influence this decision?What is the selection process for AP's to choose WLC, as I see AP's not joining WLC in there building but joining a WLC in other adjacent building? Is there a way for me to influence this decision?
Best way to do this is configure AP High Availability of APs with primary,secondary,tertiary WLC name & IP (both fields required). This is taking precedence over any other methods.
http://mrncciew.com/2013/04/07/ap-failover/
If you have AP join issue, try to configure DHCP option 43 & see if that helps
http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/wireless-mobility/wireless-lan-wlan/97066-dhcp-option-43-00.html
If this is one off case, you can try static or broadcast forwarding as a interim solution
http://mrncciew.com/2013/03/17/ap-registration/
http://mrncciew.com/2013/05/04/wlc-discovery-via-broadcast/
HTH
Rasika
*** Pls rate all useful responses *** -
We are on ASE 15.0.3/EBF 21284 ESD#4.3 working on a application with over 3000 stored procedures.
Our server optimization goal is allrows_mix.
The Merge-Join is giving us problems. When a query uses Merge-Join, it usually take an order of magnitude longer to run than if we force it
to use the other types of joins - nested-loop, n-ary-nested-loop, or hash-join.
The query plan shows sorting on worktables leading into the merge-join.
I know I can disable it with "set merge_join off", or "set plan optgoal allrows_oltp", but I'd rather not if I can fix the problem instead.
Question: Are there configuration options that would help merge-join?
I've done variations of this:
sp_configure "number of sort buffers", 32000
I've also done variations of this in the proc:
set parallel_degree 5
set scan_parallel_degree 4
When I run the following command, I see sort buffer starvation:
1> sp_monitorconfig "sort buffers"
2> go
Usage information at date and time: Apr 24 2014 2:31PM.
Name Num_free Num_active Pct_act Max_Used Reuse_cnt
number of sort buffers 0 82045 100.00 82045 0
(1 row affected)
(return status = 0)
Maybe there are other configuration option to help merge-joins? Any ideas?
Thanks.Well, I'm gonna have to emphatically disagree with your comment ...
"regressing back to allrows_oltp setting to solve your performance problems should not be encouraged"
For *EVERY* client I've worked with on migrating from ASE 12.5.x to ASE 15.x ... they all had the same objective ... get through the migration as quickly as possible and do not degrade the performance of our database queries. Unfortunately for every client I've worked with ... ASE 15.x, and the default of allrows_mix, did just the opposite, ie, migrations took much longer than expected/planned due primarily to huge performance degradation across their SQL inventory.
For most of my clients merge joins were rarely, if ever, used in ASE 12.5.x. And since hash joins never existed, that leaves us with using nested loop joins in ASE 15.x in an attempt to stay as close to ASE 12.5.x in terms of performance.
NOTE: No, I don't consider compatibility mode as a solution as this requires you go through 2 migrations ... once to compatibility mode ... and eventually once to get off of compatibility mode.
Now, can merge joins improve the performance of *some* queries? Absolutely, but in practice ... especially with the first 4-5 years of ASE 15.x releases ... merge joins caused more headaches and performance degradation than they were worth. I've seen too many clients spend huge amounts of time trying to re-write code to work with merge joins, often failing and having to 'regress back' to nested loop joins in the end.
Unfortunately a) Sybase delivered ASE 15.x with allows_mix as the default and b) most companies didn't have enough migration experience to understand the pitfalls of trying to run all of their queries under the default of allrows_mix. This meant that many companies were left having to 'regress back' to alternative solutions (eg, allrows_oltp, compat mode, don't migrate, move to another RDBMS) to address the performance degradation introduced with ASE 15.x and the default setting of allrows_mix. -
SQL Server 2014 - ColumnStore index Clustered with Merge Join
Hi All,
I would like to know in SQL Server 2014, the new feature "Clustered Columnstore". I had inserted 9 millions of records in to a clustered columnstore table.
Then i do a merge join query to insert and update to another table. The Merge join query is as below :
MERGE [dbo].[Temp_FactSales] AS TARGET
USING [dbo].[FactSales_9m] AS SOURCE
ON
TARGET.SALESID = SOURCE.SALESID
WHEN NOT MATCHED BY TARGET
THEN INSERT
[listid],
[sellerid],
[buyerid],
[eventid],
[dateid],
[qtysold],
[pricepaid],
[commission],
[saletime]
VALUES
SOURCE.[listid],
SOURCE.[sellerid],
SOURCE.[buyerid],
SOURCE.[eventid],
SOURCE.[dateid],
SOURCE.[qtysold],
SOURCE.[pricepaid],
SOURCE.[commission],
SOURCE.[saletime]
WHEN MATCHED THEN
UPDATE
SET
TARGET.[listid] = SOURCE.[listid],
TARGET.[sellerid] = SOURCE.[sellerid],
TARGET.[buyerid] = SOURCE.[buyerid],
TARGET.[eventid] = SOURCE.[eventid],
TARGET.[dateid] = SOURCE.[dateid],
TARGET.[qtysold] = SOURCE.[qtysold],
TARGET.[pricepaid] = SOURCE.[pricepaid],
TARGET.[commission] = SOURCE.[commission],
TARGET.[saletime] = SOURCE.[saletime]
The total execute time is about 10 mins. However if i removed the Columnstore index in the table which using normal primary key. Then the execution time is less than 1 mins.
My question is when using "merge join", is this the behavior for columnstore index ? As from what i read, Columnstore index is great performance in read the data but not doing "Insert, update and Delete"?
Hope anyone can help.
Thanks a lot.Hi TTL1964,
How's everything going?
If there is any progress from your side, feel free to share it in the forum.
Thanks.
Tracy Cai
TechNet Community Support -
Hi,
I have a query which is using MERGE JOIN CARTESIAN (see step 4 and 11 in execution plan bellow) and i believe this is the culprit and query is never returning. Stats are up to date on all tables. This query involves two remote databases which are accessed using VIEWs from local database. Is there any hint which i can use here to avoid merge join Cartesian and test. Thanks. Also pasting query if any one can have any idea.
Select distinct
substr(Revenue.FKDAT,5,2) || '/' || substr(Revenue.FKDAT,7,2) || '/' || substr(Revenue.FKDAT,1,4) INVOICE_DATE
, Revenue.VBELN INVOICE_NR
, Revenue.ARKTX CUSTDEVICE
, (case Revenue.ZU_LOTID
when null then hstg_partinfo_cust_dw.CUSTPARTOUT
when '' then hstg_partinfo_cust_dw.CUSTPARTOUT
Else
(case decode(trim(zodss1b2.biztype),'TNR-E330-BAKE','TNR','')
when 'TNR' then
(case when (select CUSTPARTOUT from hstg_partinfo_cust_dw Where lotid = 'U' || substr(Revenue.ZU_LOTID,2,7) || '.' || substr(Revenue.ZU_LOTID,9) and stage = 'T998-TFIN' and rownum = 1)
is null then (select CUSTPARTOUT from hstg_partinfo_cust_dw Where lotid = (select parentid from hstg_partinfo_cust_dw where lotid = 'U' || substr(Revenue.ZU_LOTID,2,7) || '.' || substr(Revenue.ZU_LOTID,9) and stage = 'E330-BAKE' and rownum = 1) and stage = 'T998-TFIN' and rownum = 1)
else (select CUSTPARTOUT from hstg_partinfo_cust_dw Where lotid = 'U' || substr(Revenue.ZU_LOTID,2,7) || '.' || substr(Revenue.ZU_LOTID,9) and stage = 'T998-TFIN' and rownum = 1)
end)
else hstg_partinfo_cust_dw.CUSTPARTOUT
end)
end) CUSTPARTOUT
, Revenue.PONUM DO_NR
, Revenue.BSTKD PO_NR
, Revenue.FKIMG GD_QTY
, Revenue.zkbetr GD_PRICE
, Revenue.NETWR GD_AMT
, '' REJ_QTY
, '' REJ_PRICE
, '' REJ_AMT
, Revenue.ZU_LOTID LOTTYPE
,(case Revenue.ZU_LOTID
when null then substr(Revenue.ZU_PRTID,1,instr(Revenue.ZU_PRTID,'.') -1)
when '' then substr(Revenue.ZU_PRTID,1,instr(Revenue.ZU_PRTID,'.') -1)
Else
(case decode(trim(zodss1b2.biztype),'TNR-E330-BAKE','TNR','')
when 'TNR' then
(case when (select substr(PARTID,1,instr(PARTID,'.') -1) from hstg_partinfo_cust_dw Where lotid = 'U' || substr(Revenue.ZU_LOTID,2,7) || '.' || substr(Revenue.ZU_LOTID,9) and stage = 'T998-TFIN' and rownum = 1)
is null then (select substr(PARTID,1,instr(PARTID,'.') -1) from hstg_partinfo_cust_dw Where lotid = (select parentid from hstg_partinfo_cust_dw where lotid = 'U' || substr(Revenue.ZU_LOTID,2,7) || '.' || substr(Revenue.ZU_LOTID,9) and stage = 'E330-BAKE' and rownum = 1) and stage = 'T998-TFIN' and rownum = 1)
else (select substr(PARTID,1,instr(PARTID,'.') -1) from hstg_partinfo_cust_dw Where lotid = 'U' || substr(Revenue.ZU_LOTID,2,7) || '.' || substr(Revenue.ZU_LOTID,9) and stage = 'T998-TFIN' and rownum = 1)
end)
else substr(Revenue.ZU_PRTID,1,instr(Revenue.ZU_PRTID,'.') -1)
end)
end) PARTID
, '' TESTER
, substr(zodss1b2.BSTDK,5,2) || '/' || substr(zodss1b2.BSTDK,7,2) || '/' || substr(zodss1b2.BSTDK,1,4) DO_DATE
, hstg_partinfo_cust_dw.package package
, hstg_partinfo_cust_dw.pincount pincount
, (select c.catg07 from ops$ods_adm.catg c where c.partid=revenue.zu_prtid) as package_size
, (select c.catg09 from ops$ods_adm.catg c where c.partid=revenue.zu_prtid) as wafer_size
, decode(trim(zodss1b2.biztype),'TNR-E330-BAKE','TNR','') BIZTYPE
--from revenue, zodss1b2,dim_partinfo
from revenue, zodss1b2,hstg_partinfo_cust_dw
where Revenue.Remarks <> 'CANCELLED'
and Revenue.FKART in ('ZUF2')
and Revenue.KUNNR in ('BC1001','BC1002','BC1003')
and Revenue.FKDAT like '201008%'
and Revenue.FKIMG > 0
and Revenue.kpein > 0
and Revenue.ZU_LOTID = zodss1b2.charg
and Revenue.MATNR = zodss1b2.matnr
--and Revenue.ZU_PRTID = dim_partinfo.partid
and hstg_partinfo_cust_dw.lotid='U' || substr(Revenue.ZU_LOTID,2,7) || '.' || substr(Revenue.ZU_LOTID,9)
Union all
Select distinct
substr(Revenue.FKDAT,5,2) || '/' || substr(Revenue.FKDAT,7,2) || '/' || substr(Revenue.FKDAT,1,4) INVOICE_DATE
, Revenue.VBELN INVOICE_NR
, Revenue.ARKTX CUSTDEVICE
, hstg_partinfo_cust_dw.CUSTPARTOUT CUSTPARTOUT
, Revenue.PONUM DO_NR
, Revenue.BSTKD PO_NR
, Revenue.FKIMG GD_QTY
, Revenue.zkbetr GD_PRICE
, Revenue.NETWR GD_AMT
, '' REJ_QTY
, '' REJ_PRICE
, '' REJ_AMT
, Revenue.ZU_LOTID LOTTYPE
, substr(Revenue.ZU_PRTID,1,instr(Revenue.ZU_PRTID,'.') -1) PARTID
, '' TESTER
, substr(zodsscrap.BSTDK,5,2) || '/' || substr(zodsscrap.BSTDK,7,2) || '/' || substr(zodsscrap.BSTDK,1,4) DO_DATE
, hstg_partinfo_cust_dw.package package
, hstg_partinfo_cust_dw.pincount pincount
, (select c.catg07 from ops$ods_adm.catg c where c.partid=revenue.zu_prtid) as package_size
, (select c.catg09 from ops$ods_adm.catg c where c.partid=revenue.zu_prtid) as wafer_size
--from revenue, zodsscrap,dim_partinfo
from revenue, zodsscrap,hstg_partinfo_cust_dw
where Revenue.Remarks <> 'CANCELLED'
and Revenue.FKART in ('ZUF2')
and Revenue.KUNNR in ('BC1001','BC1002','BC1003')
and Revenue.FKDAT like '201008%'
and Revenue.FKIMG > 0
and Revenue.kpein > 0
and Revenue.ZU_LOTID = zodsscrap.charg
--and Revenue.ZU_PRTID = dim_partinfo.partid
and hstg_partinfo_cust_dw.lotid='U' || substr(Revenue.ZU_LOTID,2,7) || '.' || substr(Revenue.ZU_LOTID,9);hstg_partinfo_cust_dw is a view which is on remote database USGDWDBP and is queried using synonym in the local database.
revenue is also a view which is in another remote database which is queried using synonym in local database.
ODS Plan
| Id | Operation | Name | Rows | Bytes | Cost | Inst |IN-OUT|
| 0 | SELECT STATEMENT | | 2 | 8532 | 999 | | |
| 1 | UNION-ALL | | | | | | |
| 2 | SORT UNIQUE | | 1 | 4277 | 985 | | |
| 3 | NESTED LOOPS | | 1 | 4277 | 983 | | |
| 4 | MERGE JOIN CARTESIAN| | 1 | 4107 | 980 | | |
| 5 | REMOTE | | 1 | 4076 | 2 | USGDW~ | R->S |
| 6 | BUFFER SORT | | 918K| 27M| 978 | | |
| 7 | TABLE ACCESS FULL | ZODSS1B2 | 918K| 27M| 978 | | |
| 8 | REMOTE | | 1 | 170 | 3 | SAPP0~ | R->S |
| 9 | SORT UNIQUE | | 1 | 4255 | 14 | | |
| 10 | NESTED LOOPS | | 1 | 4255 | 12 | | |
| 11 | MERGE JOIN CARTESIAN| | 1 | 4096 | 9 | | |
| 12 | REMOTE | | 1 | 4076 | 2 | USGDW~ | R->S |
| 13 | BUFFER SORT | | 1755 | 35100 | 7 | | |
| 14 | TABLE ACCESS FULL | ZODSSCRAP | 1755 | 35100 | 7 | | |
| 15 | REMOTE | | 1 | 159 | 3 | SAPP0~ | R->S |
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Thanks in advance
SalmanDear Salman Qureshi,
First of all please see Jonathan Lewis' post about the merge join cartesian;
http://jonathanlewis.wordpress.com/2006/12/13/cartesian-merge-join/
You may also check the Thomas Kyte's thread;
http://asktom.oracle.com/pls/asktom/f?p=100:11:0::::P11_QUESTION_ID:4105951726381
You merge join cartesian cost is so low that the impact will not be that high.
Yes, there are ways to avoid the merge join cartesian. First you have to check the where conditions. Merge join cartesian steps are happening because of the bad SQL algorithm OR sometimes Oracle needs to have a merge join cartesian. At the end, it is up to your SQL.
After than that, you can also use the ORDERED CBO hint to avoid the merge join cartesian.
Please add below line after the SELECT clause and see the new execution plan;
/*+ ORDERED */I hope your problem will be fixed when you show the CBO to use the ORDERED Oracle hint.
About the ORDERED Oracle hint, please check it out;
http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/B14117_01/server.101/b10752/hintsref.htm#5555
ORDERED
The ORDERED hint causes Oracle to join tables in the order in which they appear in the FROM clause.
If you omit the ORDERED hint from a SQL statement performing a join, then the optimizer chooses the order in which to join the tables. You might want to use the ORDERED hint to specify a join order if you know something about the number of rows selected from each table that the optimizer does not. Such information lets you choose an inner and outer table better than the optimizer could.Hope That Helps.
Ogan -
Why is LOWER function producing a cartesian merge join, when UPPER doesn't?
Hi there,
I have an odd scenario that I would like to understand correctly...
We have a query that is taking a long time to run on one of our databases, further investigation of the explain plan showed that the query was in fact producing a Cartesian merge join even though there is clearly join criteria specified. I know that the optimiser can and will do this if it is a more efficient way of producing the results, however in this scenario it is producing the Cartesian merge on two unrelated tables and seemingly ignoring the Join condition...
*** ORIGINAL QUERY ***
SELECT count(*)
FROM srs_sce sce,
srs_scj scj,
men_mre mre,
srs_mst mst,
cam_smo cam,
ins_spr spr,
men_mua mua,
temp_webct_users u
WHERE sce.sce_scjc = scj.scj_code
AND sce.sce_stuc = mre.mre_code
AND mst.mst_code = mre.mre_mstc
AND mre.mre_mrcc = 'STU'
AND mst.mst_code = mua.mua_mstc
AND cam.ayr_code = sce.sce_ayrc
AND cam.spr_code = scj.scj_sprc
AND spr.spr_code = scj.scj_sprc
-- Ignored Join Condition
AND LOWER(mua.mua_extu) = LOWER(u.login)
AND SUBSTR (sce.sce_ayrc, 1, 4) = '2008'
AND sce.sce_stac IN ('RCE', 'RLL', 'RPD', 'RIN', 'RSAS', 'RHL_R', 'RCO', 'RCI', 'RCA');
*** CARTESIAN EXPLAIN PLAN ***
SELECT STATEMENT CHOOSECost: 83
20 NESTED LOOPS Cost: 83 Bytes: 176 Cardinality: 1
18 NESTED LOOPS Cost: 82 Bytes: 148 Cardinality: 1
15 NESTED LOOPS Cost: 80 Bytes: 134 Cardinality: 1
13 NESTED LOOPS Cost: 79 Bytes: 123 Cardinality: 1
10 NESTED LOOPS Cost: 78 Bytes: 98 Cardinality: 1
7 NESTED LOOPS Cost: 77 Bytes: 74 Cardinality: 1
NOTE: The Cartesian product is performed on the men_mre & temp_webct_users tables not the men_mua mua & temp_webct_users tables specified in the join condition.
4 MERGE JOIN CARTESIAN Cost: 74 Bytes: 32 Cardinality: 1
1 TABLE ACCESS FULL EXETER.TEMP_WEBCT_USERS Cost: 3 Bytes: 6 Cardinality: 1
3 BUFFER SORT Cost: 71 Bytes: 1,340,508 Cardinality: 51,558
2 TABLE ACCESS FULL SIPR.MEN_MRE Cost: 71 Bytes: 1,340,508 Cardinality: 51,558
6 TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID SIPR.SRS_SCE Cost: 3 Bytes: 42 Cardinality: 1
5 INDEX RANGE SCAN SIPR.SRS_SCEI3 Cost: 2 Cardinality: 3
9 TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID SIPR.SRS_SCJ Cost: 1 Bytes: 24 Cardinality: 1
8 INDEX UNIQUE SCAN SIPR.SRS_SCJP1 Cardinality: 1
12 TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID SIPR.INS_SPR Cost: 1 Bytes: 25 Cardinality: 1
11 INDEX UNIQUE SCAN SIPR.INS_SPRP1 Cardinality: 1
14 INDEX UNIQUE SCAN SIPR.SRS_MSTP1 Cost: 1 Bytes: 11 Cardinality: 1
17 TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID SIPR.MEN_MUA Cost: 2 Bytes: 14 Cardinality: 1
16 INDEX RANGE SCAN SIPR.MEN_MUAI3 Cost: 2 Cardinality: 1
19 INDEX RANGE SCAN SIPR.CAM_SMOP1 Cost: 2 Bytes: 28 Cardinality: 1 After speaking with data experts I realised one of the fields being LOWERed for the join condition generally always had uppercase values so I tried modifying the query to use the UPPER function rather than the LOWER one originally used, in this scenario the query executed in seconds and the Cartesian merge had been eradicated which by all accounts is a good result.
*** WORKING QUERY ***
SELECT count(*)
FROM srs_sce sce,
srs_scj scj,
men_mre mre,
srs_mst mst,
cam_smo cam,
ins_spr spr,
men_mua mua,
temp_webct_users u
WHERE sce.sce_scjc = scj.scj_code
AND sce.sce_stuc = mre.mre_code
AND mst.mst_code = mre.mre_mstc
AND mre.mre_mrcc = 'STU'
AND mst.mst_code = mua.mua_mstc
AND cam.ayr_code = sce.sce_ayrc
AND cam.spr_code = scj.scj_sprc
AND spr.spr_code = scj.scj_sprc
-- Working Join Condition
AND UPPER(mua.mua_extu) = UPPER(u.login)
AND SUBSTR (sce.sce_ayrc, 1, 4) = '2008'
AND sce.sce_stac IN ('RCE', 'RLL', 'RPD', 'RIN', 'RSAS', 'RHL_R', 'RCO', 'RCI', 'RCA');
*** WORKING EXPLAIN PLAN ***
SELECT STATEMENT CHOOSECost: 13
20 SORT AGGREGATE Bytes: 146 Cardinality: 1
19 NESTED LOOPS Cost: 13 Bytes: 146 Cardinality: 1
17 NESTED LOOPS Cost: 12 Bytes: 134 Cardinality: 1
15 NESTED LOOPS Cost: 11 Bytes: 115 Cardinality: 1
12 NESTED LOOPS Cost: 10 Bytes: 91 Cardinality: 1
9 NESTED LOOPS Cost: 7 Bytes: 57 Cardinality: 1
6 NESTED LOOPS Cost: 6 Bytes: 31 Cardinality: 1
4 NESTED LOOPS Cost: 5 Bytes: 20 Cardinality: 1
1 TABLE ACCESS FULL EXETER.TEMP_WEBCT_USERS Cost: 3 Bytes: 6 Cardinality: 1
3 TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID SIPR.MEN_MUA Cost: 2 Bytes: 42 Cardinality: 3
2 INDEX RANGE SCAN EXETER.TEST Cost: 1 Cardinality: 1
5 INDEX UNIQUE SCAN SIPR.SRS_MSTP1 Cost: 1 Bytes: 11 Cardinality: 1
8 TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID SIPR.MEN_MRE Cost: 2 Bytes: 26 Cardinality: 1
7 INDEX RANGE SCAN SIPR.MEN_MREI2 Cost: 2 Cardinality: 1
11 TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID SIPR.SRS_SCE Cost: 3 Bytes: 34 Cardinality: 1
10 INDEX RANGE SCAN SIPR.SRS_SCEI3 Cost: 2 Cardinality: 3
14 TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID SIPR.SRS_SCJ Cost: 1 Bytes: 24 Cardinality: 1
13 INDEX UNIQUE SCAN SIPR.SRS_SCJP1 Cardinality: 1
16 INDEX RANGE SCAN SIPR.CAM_SMOP1 Cost: 2 Bytes: 19 Cardinality: 1
18 INDEX UNIQUE SCAN SIPR.INS_SPRP1 Bytes: 12 Cardinality: 1 *** RESULT ***
COUNT(*)
83299I am still struggling to understand why this would have worked as to my knowledge the LOWER & UPPER functions are similar enough in function and regardless of that why would one version cause the optimiser to effectively ignore a join condition.
If anyone can shed any light on this for me it would be very much appreciated.
Regards,
Kieron
Edited by: Kieron_Bird on Nov 19, 2008 6:09 AM
Edited by: Kieron_Bird on Nov 19, 2008 6:41 AMMy mistake on the predicate information, was in a rush to run off to a meeting when I posted the entry...
*** UPPER Version of the Explain Plan ***
| Id | Operation | Name | Rows | Bytes | Cost | TQ |IN-OUT| PQ Distrib |
| 0 | SELECT STATEMENT | | 1 | 146 | 736 | | | |
| 1 | SORT AGGREGATE | | 1 | 146 | | | | |
| 2 | SORT AGGREGATE | | 1 | 146 | | 86,10 | P->S | QC (RAND) |
|* 3 | HASH JOIN | | 241 | 35186 | 736 | 86,10 | PCWP | |
|* 4 | HASH JOIN | | 774 | 105K| 733 | 86,09 | P->P | HASH |
|* 5 | HASH JOIN | | 12608 | 1489K| 642 | 86,08 | P->P | BROADCAST |
| 6 | NESTED LOOPS | | 14657 | 1531K| 491 | 86,07 | P->P | HASH |
|* 7 | HASH JOIN | | 14657 | 1359K| 490 | 86,07 | PCWP | |
|* 8 | HASH JOIN | | 14371 | 996K| 418 | 86,06 | P->P | HASH |
|* 9 | TABLE ACCESS FULL | SRS_SCE | 3211 | 106K| 317 | 86,00 | S->P | BROADCAST |
|* 10 | HASH JOIN | | 52025 | 1879K| 101 | 86,06 | PCWP | |
|* 11 | TABLE ACCESS FULL | MEN_MRE | 51622 | 1310K| 71 | 86,01 | S->P | HASH |
| 12 | INDEX FAST FULL SCAN| SRS_MSTP1 | 383K| 4119K| 30 | 86,05 | P->P | HASH |
| 13 | TABLE ACCESS FULL | SRS_SCJ | 114K| 2672K| 72 | 86,02 | S->P | HASH |
|* 14 | INDEX UNIQUE SCAN | INS_SPRP1 | 1 | 12 | | 86,07 | PCWP | |
| 15 | TABLE ACCESS FULL | MEN_MUA | 312K| 4268K| 151 | 86,03 | S->P | HASH |
| 16 | INDEX FAST FULL SCAN | CAM_SMOP1 | 527K| 9796K| 91 | 86,09 | PCWP | |
| 17 | TABLE ACCESS FULL | TEMP_WEBCT_USERS | 33276 | 194K| 3 | 86,04 | S->P | HASH |
Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
3 - access(UPPER("MUA"."MUA_EXTU")=UPPER("U"."LOGIN"))
4 - access("CAM"."AYR_CODE"="SCE"."SCE_AYRC" AND "CAM"."SPR_CODE"="SCJ"."SCJ_SPRC")
5 - access("MST"."MST_CODE"="MUA"."MUA_MSTC")
7 - access("SCE"."SCE_SCJC"="SCJ"."SCJ_CODE")
8 - access("SCE"."SCE_STUC"="MRE"."MRE_CODE")
9 - filter(SUBSTR("SCE"."SCE_AYRC",1,4)='2008' AND ("SCE"."SCE_STAC"='RCA' OR "SCE"."SCE_STAC"='RCE' OR
"SCE"."SCE_STAC"='RCI' OR "SCE"."SCE_STAC"='RCO' OR "SCE"."SCE_STAC"='RHL_R' OR "SCE"."SCE_STAC"='RIN' OR
"SCE"."SCE_STAC"='RLL' OR "SCE"."SCE_STAC"='RPD' OR "SCE"."SCE_STAC"='RSAS'))
10 - access("MST"."MST_CODE"="MRE"."MRE_MSTC")
11 - filter("MRE"."MRE_MRCC"='STU')
14 - access("SPR"."SPR_CODE"="SCJ"."SCJ_SPRC")
Note: cpu costing is off
40 rows selected.*** LOWER Version of the Explain Plan ***
| Id | Operation | Name | Rows | Bytes | Cost | TQ |IN-OUT| PQ Distrib |
| 0 | SELECT STATEMENT | | 1 | 146 | 736 | | | |
| 1 | SORT AGGREGATE | | 1 | 146 | | | | |
| 2 | SORT AGGREGATE | | 1 | 146 | | 88,10 | P->S | QC (RAND) |
|* 3 | HASH JOIN | | 257K| 35M| 736 | 88,10 | PCWP | |
|* 4 | HASH JOIN | | 774 | 105K| 733 | 88,09 | P->P | HASH |
|* 5 | HASH JOIN | | 12608 | 1489K| 642 | 88,08 | P->P | BROADCAST |
| 6 | NESTED LOOPS | | 14657 | 1531K| 491 | 88,07 | P->P | HASH |
|* 7 | HASH JOIN | | 14657 | 1359K| 490 | 88,07 | PCWP | |
|* 8 | HASH JOIN | | 14371 | 996K| 418 | 88,06 | P->P | HASH |
|* 9 | TABLE ACCESS FULL | SRS_SCE | 3211 | 106K| 317 | 88,00 | S->P | BROADCAST |
|* 10 | HASH JOIN | | 52025 | 1879K| 101 | 88,06 | PCWP | |
|* 11 | TABLE ACCESS FULL | MEN_MRE | 51622 | 1310K| 71 | 88,01 | S->P | HASH |
| 12 | INDEX FAST FULL SCAN| SRS_MSTP1 | 383K| 4119K| 30 | 88,05 | P->P | HASH |
| 13 | TABLE ACCESS FULL | SRS_SCJ | 114K| 2672K| 72 | 88,02 | S->P | HASH |
|* 14 | INDEX UNIQUE SCAN | INS_SPRP1 | 1 | 12 | | 88,07 | PCWP | |
| 15 | TABLE ACCESS FULL | MEN_MUA | 312K| 4268K| 151 | 88,03 | S->P | HASH |
| 16 | INDEX FAST FULL SCAN | CAM_SMOP1 | 527K| 9796K| 91 | 88,09 | PCWP | |
| 17 | TABLE ACCESS FULL | TEMP_WEBCT_USERS | 33276 | 194K| 3 | 88,04 | S->P | HASH |
Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
3 - access(LOWER("MUA"."MUA_EXTU")=LOWER("U"."LOGIN"))
4 - access("CAM"."AYR_CODE"="SCE"."SCE_AYRC" AND "CAM"."SPR_CODE"="SCJ"."SCJ_SPRC")
5 - access("MST"."MST_CODE"="MUA"."MUA_MSTC")
7 - access("SCE"."SCE_SCJC"="SCJ"."SCJ_CODE")
8 - access("SCE"."SCE_STUC"="MRE"."MRE_CODE")
9 - filter(SUBSTR("SCE"."SCE_AYRC",1,4)='2008' AND ("SCE"."SCE_STAC"='RCA' OR "SCE"."SCE_STAC"='RCE' OR
"SCE"."SCE_STAC"='RCI' OR "SCE"."SCE_STAC"='RCO' OR "SCE"."SCE_STAC"='RHL_R' OR "SCE"."SCE_STAC"='RIN' OR
"SCE"."SCE_STAC"='RLL' OR "SCE"."SCE_STAC"='RPD' OR "SCE"."SCE_STAC"='RSAS'))
10 - access("MST"."MST_CODE"="MRE"."MRE_MSTC")
11 - filter("MRE"."MRE_MRCC"='STU')
14 - access("SPR"."SPR_CODE"="SCJ"."SCJ_SPRC")
Note: cpu costing is off
40 rows selected.As you state something has obviously changed, but nothing obvious has been changed.
We gather statistics via...
exec dbms_stats.gather_schema_stats(ownname => 'USERNAME', estimate_percent => DBMS_STATS.AUTO_SAMPLE_SIZE , degree => 4, granularity => ''ALL'', cascade => TRUE);
We run a script nightly which works out which indexes require a rebuild and rebuild those only it doesn;t just rebuild all indexes.
It would be nice to be able to use the 10g statistics history, but on this instance we aren't yet at that version, hopefully we will be there soon though.
Hope this helps,
Kieron -
Facing Merge Join Cartersian in the explain plan after adding gl periods
Hi All
I have added gl periods table to the below query , checked the explain plan and it shows merge join cartesian. This query is taking long time to fetch the results.
Need help ASAP , Please let me know where i am going wrong . Any suggestions will be appreciated.
SELECT gljh.period_name, gljh.ledger_id, gljh.je_source,
glcc.segment2,
SUM ( NVL (gljl.accounted_dr, 0)
- NVL (gljl.accounted_cr, 0)
) total_amt,
gljh.currency_code
FROM gl_je_headers gljh,
gl_je_lines gljl,
gl_code_combinations glcc,
gl_periods gps
WHERE 1=1
AND gljh.period_name = gps.period_name
AND gljl.period_name = gps.period_name
AND gps.period_set_name = 'MCD_MONTH_'
AND gps.start_date >= :p_from_date
AND gps.start_date <= :p_to_date
AND gljh.ledger_id = :p_ledger_id
AND gljh.je_header_id = gljl.je_header_id
AND gljl.code_combination_id = glcc.code_combination_id
AND glcc.segment2 = '10007'--get_segment2_rec.flex_value
AND gljh.currency_code <> 'STAT'
GROUP BY gljh.je_source,
gljh.period_name,
glcc.segment2,
gljh.ledger_id,
gljh.currency_code
HAVING SUM ( NVL (gljl.accounted_dr, 0)
- NVL (gljl.accounted_cr, 0)
) <> 0;
Plan
SELECT STATEMENT ALL_ROWSCost: 73,146 Bytes: 2,266 Cardinality: 22
15 FILTER
14 HASH GROUP BY Cost: 73,146 Bytes: 2,266 Cardinality: 22
13 FILTER
12 NESTED LOOPS Cost: 73,145 Bytes: 61,079 Cardinality: 593
9 NESTED LOOPS Cost: 31,603 Bytes: 1,452,780 Cardinality: 20,754
6 MERGE JOIN CARTESIAN Cost: 2,108 Bytes: 394,181 Cardinality: 9,167
2 TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID TABLE GL.GL_PERIODS Cost: 4 Bytes: 31 Cardinality: 1
1 INDEX RANGE SCAN INDEX (UNIQUE) GL.GL_PERIODS_U2 Cost: 1 Cardinality: 64
5 BUFFER SORT Cost: 2,104 Bytes: 683,988 Cardinality: 56,999
4 TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID TABLE GL.GL_CODE_COMBINATIONS Cost: 2,104 Bytes: 683,988 Cardinality: 56,999
3 INDEX RANGE SCAN INDEX GL.GL_CODE_COMBINATIONS_N2 Cost: 155 Cardinality: 56,999
8 TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID TABLE GL.GL_JE_LINES Cost: 18 Bytes: 54 Cardinality: 2
7 INDEX RANGE SCAN INDEX GL.GL_JE_LINES_N1 Cost: 3 Cardinality: 37
11 TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID TABLE GL.GL_JE_HEADERS Cost: 2 Bytes: 33 Cardinality: 1
10 INDEX UNIQUE SCAN INDEX (UNIQUE) GL.GL_JE_HEADERS_U1 Cost: 1 Cardinality: 1
Thanks
ChandraLots of things come into play when you're tuning a query.
An (unformatted) execution plan isn't enough.
Tuning takes time and understanding how (a lot of) things work, there is no ASAP in the world of tuning.
Please post other important details, like your database version, optimizer settings, how/when are table statistics gathered etc.
So, read the following informative threads (and please take your time, this really is important stuff), and adust your thread as needed.
That way you'll have a bigger chance of getting help that makes sense...
Your DBA should/ought to be able to help you in this as well.
Re: HOW TO: Post a SQL statement tuning request - template posting
http://oracle-randolf.blogspot.com/2009/02/basic-sql-statement-performance.html -
Dynamic SQL from within DML - merging syntax issue #2
Further to my previous thread on a SQL - DML merging syntax issue, I have another problem with multiple conditions in the WHERE-clause:
vrb _retval decimal
vrb _val1 text
vrb _val2 text
_val1 = 'value1'
_val2 = 'value2'
SQL SELECT DIM1_ATTR1 FROM MYSCHEMA.DIM1_DIM WHERE COL1 = :_val1, AND COL2 = :_val2, INTO :_retval
The above SQL will return NA. If I use the text literals instead of the OLAP variables, the query just runs fine. Also, with a single condition (on COL1 only) the query returns the expected value.
A note in the help states that OLAP DML objects should clearly be sperated from the rest of the SQL but does not say how. I am using a colon before and a comma after as without them the line would not compile. I could not find any example that would use multiple conditions in the WHERE-clause however the help text indicates that it is possible.
Please help me, how.
Regards,
Csaba
Windows, Oracle10gRel2 Ver. 10.2.0.1.0 eversion: 84090It does work, although I applied the finishing touch by removing the commas as well!
Thanks a lot! Good job!
Could you please have a look at issue #1 too? :-)
Regards,
Csaba -
I have query whch when I do showplan ...
It show merge join is happening at client place and
not at mine....
Can anybody suggest as what is reason behind this
merge join to occur.
Merge join should not occur at any cost...
It is slowing down my performance of Query and taking lot of time...Impossible to tell without viewing the query. Please post the 'offending' statement.
Maybe you are looking for
-
iSync crashes while synching with palm. Loading “Conflict Notifier” Notifier 'Conduit Conflict Notifier' version 1.0.0 Notifier Conduit Conflict Notifier OK Loading “Install Conduit” Conduit “Install” version 3.0.0 Sync type is Install/Restore OK Ins
-
HT1351 I have the latest iTunes, and I synced my iPod several times, but the music wont transfer!
I have the latest version of iTunes and I have the latest iOS, but the music i download onto iTunes on my computer wont sync into my iPod, even though I tried syncing it several times! Any thought on whats wrong and how to fix it?
-
How to set google.co.uk instead of google Canada
I sue Firefox and Google is my default search engine. I live in the UK and want Google to start seacrhing for UK entries. However it starts searching in Canada. How do I change it to search the UK?
-
I am trying to install Solaris 10 on various Ultra II based systems (Ultra 60, AXi etc) which have been running FreeBSD. Solaris 10 reports "No Disks Found"! Solaris 9 can be installed, after which Sol10 can see them, however this is inconvenient for
-
Photoshop Elements 8 Slideshow transition question
Hi, I'm creating a slideshow using Photoshop Elements 8 and can't seem to figure out how to have the pan/zoom effect per picture continue through my transitions. I was able to successfully have pan/zoom work through my dissolves when I created a sli