Performance of Static LOVs

Question

I have a report region with a couple of "Display as Text (based on LOV)" columns using a Named LOV with static entries (some cute images and stuff). I mentioned this in Using Static Named LOV to show images in report
The report region displays 60 rows/page. I find that it takes a (relatively) long time for the named LOV queries to kick in. Doing a &p_trace=YES shows me the following
SELECT ID, LOV_QUERY
FROM
WWV_FLOW_LISTS_OF_VALUES$ WHERE FLOW_ID = :B2 AND LOV_NAME = UPPER(:B1 )
call     count       cpu    elapsed       disk      query    current        rows
Parse        1      0.00       0.00          0          0          0           0
Execute    116      0.03       0.04          0          0          0           0
Fetch      232      0.01       0.01          0        464          0         116
total      349      0.04       0.05          0        464          0         116
Misses in library cache during parse: 1
Optimizer goal: CHOOSE
Parsing user id: 3237     (recursive depth: 1)
begin execute immediate 'begin select lov_disp_value, lov_return_value   
  bulk collect into wwv_flow_utilities.g_display,wwv_flow_utilities.g_value
  from wwv_flow_list_of_values_data  where lov_id = 3566322593397935 and
  (required_patch is null     or     (required_patch > 0 and        
  (wwv_flow_item.fetch_g_build_options_excluded is null or        
  instr(wwv_flow_item.fetch_g_build_options_excluded,
  '':''||required_patch||'':'') = 0)     )     or     (required_patch < 0 and
          (wwv_flow_item.fetch_g_build_options_included is null or        
  instr(wwv_flow_item.fetch_g_build_options_included,'':''||(0-required_patch)
  ||'':'') = 0)     )  )  and exists (select 1 from wwv_flow_lists_of_values$
  where flow_id = :flow_id and id = 3566322593397935) ; end;'  using
  v('FLOW_ID'); end;
call     count       cpu    elapsed       disk      query    current        rows
Parse      116      0.07       0.06          0          0          0           0
Execute    116      0.30       0.27          0         12          0         116
Fetch        0      0.00       0.00          0          0          0           0
total      232      0.37       0.34          0         12          0         116
Misses in library cache during parse: 1
Optimizer goal: CHOOSE
Parsing user id: 1446     (recursive depth: 1)This seems excessive. Any way to tune this?
Thanks

Answer 1

Overall, it is a very simple page with a report region on a 150 row table with some optional filters.
The trace file has the actual SQL statement executed by that PL/SQL block.
Here they are
begin select lov_disp_value, lov_return_value    bulk collect into
  wwv_flow_utilities.g_display,wwv_flow_utilities.g_value from
  wwv_flow_list_of_values_data  where lov_id = 3566322593397935 and
  (required_patch is null     or     (required_patch > 0 and        
  (wwv_flow_item.fetch_g_build_options_excluded is null or        
  instr(wwv_flow_item.fetch_g_build_options_excluded,':'||required_patch||':')
   = 0)     )     or     (required_patch < 0 and        
  (wwv_flow_item.fetch_g_build_options_included is null or        
  instr(wwv_flow_item.fetch_g_build_options_included,':'||(0-required_patch)
  ||':') = 0)     )  )  and exists (select 1 from wwv_flow_lists_of_values$
  where flow_id = :flow_id and id = 3566322593397935) ; end;
call     count       cpu    elapsed       disk      query    current        rows
Parse      116      0.05       0.05          0          0          0           0
Execute    116      0.11       0.11          0          0          0         116
Fetch        0      0.00       0.00          0          0          0           0
total      232      0.16       0.17          0          0          0         116
Misses in library cache during parse: 1
Optimizer goal: CHOOSE
Parsing user id: 1446     (recursive depth: 2)
SELECT LOV_DISP_VALUE, LOV_RETURN_VALUE
FROM
WWV_FLOW_LIST_OF_VALUES_DATA WHERE LOV_ID = 3566322593397935 AND
  (REQUIRED_PATCH IS NULL OR (REQUIRED_PATCH > 0 AND
  (WWV_FLOW_ITEM.FETCH_G_BUILD_OPTIONS_EXCLUDED IS NULL OR
  INSTR(WWV_FLOW_ITEM.FETCH_G_BUILD_OPTIONS_EXCLUDED,':'||REQUIRED_PATCH||':')
   = 0) ) OR (REQUIRED_PATCH < 0 AND
  (WWV_FLOW_ITEM.FETCH_G_BUILD_OPTIONS_INCLUDED IS NULL OR
  INSTR(WWV_FLOW_ITEM.FETCH_G_BUILD_OPTIONS_INCLUDED,':'||(0-REQUIRED_PATCH)
  ||':') = 0) ) ) AND EXISTS (SELECT 1 FROM WWV_FLOW_LISTS_OF_VALUES$ WHERE
  FLOW_ID = :B1 AND ID = 3566322593397935)
call     count       cpu    elapsed       disk      query    current        rows
Parse      116      0.02       0.01          0          0          0           0
Execute    116      0.07       0.07          0        348          0           0
Fetch      116      0.01       0.01          0        348          0         232
total      348      0.10       0.09          0        696          0         232
Misses in library cache during parse: 1
Optimizer goal: CHOOSE
Parsing user id: 1446     (recursive depth: 3)
Rows     Row Source Operation
      2  FILTER 
      2   TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID WWV_FLOW_LIST_OF_VALUES_DATA
      2    INDEX RANGE SCAN WWV_FLOW_LOV_DATA_IDX1 (object id 69923)
      1   TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID WWV_FLOW_LISTS_OF_VALUES$
      1    INDEX UNIQUE SCAN WWV_FLOW_LOV_PK (object id 69918)My apologies if this seems like nit-picking but when a dead-simple page like this takes more than 1.5 seconds to render, it bothers me.