Tunning the Query with Distinct Clause

Hi All,
I have the below query that returns 28113657 records
select src_Wc_id, osp_id, src_osp_id
from osp_complements o1
where exists (select 1 from wc_crossref wc
where wc.src_wc_id = o1.SRC_WC_ID
and wc.state = 'CA')
This query executes within a second...
But when i include a DISTINCT clause in the select statement, it takes more time ... (more than 20 mins)
I am trying to get it tunned. Please advice me with your knowledge to get it done
Thanks for your time
Kannan.

Retrieving distinct rows requires a sort of all returned rows. 20 - 3 = ~17 mins for sorting 28 mln rows looks too much. You need to tune your instance in order to speed up sort operation. The amount of memory dedicated to sorts is controlled by PGA_AGGREGATE_TARGET parameter. If it's set to 0 (not recommended) then SORT_AREA_SIZE is used. The process of PGA tuning is quite complex and described in PGA Memory Management chapter of Performance Tuning Guide.
There is a workaround which allows to bypass sort operation, but it requires proper index and proper access by that index. The idea is that rows rertrieved via index are automatically ordered by indexed columns. If that and only that columns (possibly - in the same order as in the index, I don't know) are selected using DISTINCT then sort is not actually performed. Rows are already sorted due to access via index.
Hope this will help you.
Regards,
Dima

Similar Messages

Tune the query with join and not exists

This is on 10g R2.
I have a query similar to :
Select A.*, C.*
From A inner join B on A.id = B.id
Left join C on A.kid = C.kid
Where not exists
(select * from D where A.fid = D.fid and A.stat = 2);
I want avoiding to use the NOT EXISTS in the last part of the query
I tried the autotrace explain of above and compared with others format and found no better execution plan than that. The explain plan indicated that there were long "table access full" operation on B, due to its little huge records, and a long operation of the "NESTED LOOPS OUTER". I had tried to replace the NOT EXISTS part with another LEFT JOIN in the FROM, but it went worse. So Anyone can suggest a better way? or it is the most efficient query I can get?

Here is the tkprof output
from baandb.ttfacr200201 a
   inner join baandb.ttfgld106201 c on (a.t$ttyp = c.t$otyp and a.t$ninv = c.t$odoc) and c.t$leac like :"SYS_B_0"
   left join baandb.ttfgld910201 d on c.t$dim2 = d.t$dimx and d.t$dtyp = :"SYS_B_1"
   where not exists
    (select * from baandb.tcisli205201 b
     where a.t$ttyp = b.t$ityp and a.t$ninv = b.t$idoc)
     and (a.t$trec = :"SYS_B_2" or a.t$trec = :"SYS_B_3" and t$tdoc = :"SYS_B_4")
call     count       cpu    elapsed       disk      query    current        rows
Parse        1      0.00       0.00          0          0          0           0
Execute      1      0.01       0.01          0          0          0           0
Fetch        5      1.06      52.11      29925      45943          0          54
total        7      1.07      52.12      29925      45943          0          54
Misses in library cache during parse: 1
Misses in library cache during execute: 1
Optimizer mode: ALL_ROWS
Parsing user id: 31
Rows     Row Source Operation
     54 HASH JOIN RIGHT ANTI (cr=45943 pr=29925 pw=0 time=2317005 us)
   9957   INDEX FAST FULL SCAN TCISLI205201$IDX1 (cr=39 pr=0 pw=0 time=54 us)(object id 16639)
10067   NESTED LOOPS OUTER (cr=45904 pr=29925 pw=0 time=68531937 us)
10067    HASH JOIN (cr=35837 pr=29925 pw=0 time=68471521 us)
10420     TABLE ACCESS FULL TTFACR200201 (cr=2424 pr=0 pw=0 time=20894 us)
33156     TABLE ACCESS FULL TTFGLD106201 (cr=33413 pr=29925 pw=0 time=117767552 us)
     51    INDEX UNIQUE SCAN TTFGLD910201$IDX1 (cr=10067 pr=0 pw=0 time=53177 us)(object id 20402)
OVERALL TOTALS FOR ALL NON-RECURSIVE STATEMENTS
call     count       cpu    elapsed       disk      query    current        rows
Parse        2      0.00       0.00          0          0          0           0
Execute      3      0.02       0.02          0          0          0           0
Fetch        6      1.06      52.11      29925      45943          0          55
total       11      1.08      52.14      29925      45943          0          55

How Can We Tune the Joins with "OR" Caluse ?

Hi
We've identified one Query in one of Our PL/SQL Stored Procedure which is taking huge time to fetch the records. I have simulated the problem as shown below. The problem Is, How can i tune the Jions with "OR" Clause. i have tried replacing them with Exists Caluse, But the Performance was not much was expected.
CREATE TABLE TEST
(ID NUMBER VDATE DATE );
BEGIN
FOR i IN 1 .. 100000 LOOP
    INSERT INTO TEST
    VALUES
      (i, TO_DATE(TRUNC(DBMS_RANDOM.VALUE(2452641, 2452641 + 364)), 'J'));
    IF MOD(i, 1000) = 0 THEN
      COMMIT;
    END IF;
END LOOP;
END;
CREATE TABLE RTEST1 ( ID NUMBER, VMONTH NUMBER );
INSERT INTO RTEST1
SELECT ID, TO_NUMBER(TO_CHAR(VDATE,'MM'))
FROM TEST ;
CREATE TABLE RTEST2 ( ID NUMBER, VMONTH NUMBER );
INSERT INTO RTEST2
SELECT ID, TO_NUMBER(TO_CHAR(VDATE,'MM'))
FROM TEST;
CREATE INDEX RTEST1_IDX2 ON RTEST1(VMONTH)
CREATE INDEX RTEST2_IDX1 ON RTEST2(VMONTH)
ALTER TABLE RTEST1 ADD CONSTRAINT RTEST1_PK PRIMARY KEY (ID)
ALTER TABLE RTEST2 ADD CONSTRAINT RTEST2_PK PRIMARY KEY (ID)
SELECT A.ID, B.VMONTH
FROM RTEST1 A , RTEST2 B
WHERE A.ID = B.ID
AND ( (A.ID = B.VMONTH) OR ( B.ID = A.VMONTH ) )
BEGIN
DBMS_STATS.gather_table_stats(ownname => 'PHASE30DEV',tabname => 'RTEST1');
DBMS_STATS.gather_table_stats(ownname => 'PHASE30DEV',tabname => 'RTEST2');
DBMS_STATS.gather_index_stats(ownname => 'PHASE30DEV',indname => 'RTEST1_IDX1');
DBMS_STATS.gather_index_stats(ownname => 'PHASE30DEV',indname => 'RTEST2_IDX2');
DBMS_STATS.gather_index_stats(ownname => 'PHASE30DEV',indname => 'RTEST1_IDX2');
DBMS_STATS.gather_index_stats(ownname => 'PHASE30DEV',indname => 'RTEST2_IDX1');
END; Pls suggest !!!!!!! How can I tune the Joins with "OR" Clause.
Regards
RJ

I don't like it, but you could use a hint:
SQL>r
1 SELECT A.ID, B.VMONTH
2 FROM RTEST1 A , RTEST2 B
3 WHERE A.ID = B.ID
4* AND ( (A.ID = B.VMONTH) OR ( B.ID = A.VMONTH ) )
Execution Plan
   0      SELECT STATEMENT Optimizer=CHOOSE (Cost=94 Card=2 Bytes=28)
   1    0   TABLE ACCESS (BY INDEX ROWID) OF 'RTEST2' (Cost=94 Card=1 Bytes=7)
   2    1     NESTED LOOPS (Cost=94 Card=2 Bytes=28)
   3    2       TABLE ACCESS (FULL) OF 'RTEST1' (Cost=20 Card=100000 Bytes=700000)
   4    2       BITMAP CONVERSION (TO ROWIDS)
   5    4         BITMAP AND
   6    5           BITMAP CONVERSION (FROM ROWIDS)
   7    6             INDEX (RANGE SCAN) OF 'RTEST2_PK' (UNIQUE)
   8    5           BITMAP OR
   9    8             BITMAP CONVERSION (FROM ROWIDS)
10    9               INDEX (RANGE SCAN) OF 'RTEST2_IDX1' (NON-UNIQUE)
11    8             BITMAP CONVERSION (FROM ROWIDS)
12   11               INDEX (RANGE SCAN) OF 'RTEST2_PK' (UNIQUE)
Statistics
          0 recursive calls
          0 db block gets
     300332 consistent gets
          0 physical reads
          0 redo size
        252 bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
        235 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
          2 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
          0 sorts (memory)
          0 sorts (disk)
          2 rows processed
SQL>SELECT /*+ ordered use_hash(b) */ A.ID, B.VMONTH
2    FROM RTEST1 A, RTEST2 B
3   WHERE A.ID = B.ID AND(A.ID = B.VMONTH OR B.ID = A.VMONTH)
4 ;
Execution Plan
   0      SELECT STATEMENT Optimizer=CHOOSE (Cost=175 Card=2 Bytes=28)
   1    0   HASH JOIN (Cost=175 Card=2 Bytes=28)
   2    1     TABLE ACCESS (FULL) OF 'RTEST1' (Cost=20 Card=100000 Bytes=700000)
   3    1     TABLE ACCESS (FULL) OF 'RTEST2' (Cost=20 Card=100000 Bytes=700000)
Statistics
          9 recursive calls
          0 db block gets
        256 consistent gets
        156 physical reads
          0 redo size
        252 bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
        235 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
          2 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
          0 sorts (memory)
          0 sorts (disk)
          2 rows processed

Physical queries generated with DISTINCT clause

Hi All,
We have a model with three dimension tables and a fact table. All the join conditions between dimension and fact tables are defined and dimension with level keys.
Apart from this, one of the dimension is used for applying the row level filter.
Oracle BI is generating physical queries with DISTINCT clause, which is impacting the performance of the query exeuction. Any tips in modification to business model to avoid the generation of DISTINCT clause would be appreciated.
Thanks,
Phani

hi,
Open RPD-->Double click on Logical table source in BMM layer and go to content tab .you will have Select Distinct Values by default it was uncheck if that is checked uncheck that one....(this one is only to restrict from BMM layer)
thanks,
saichand.v

Guide me to tune the query

Hi All,
I need to tune the query which is taking more than 1 hour to execute over 8 Lakhs of record.
SQL> explain plan for SELECT C.aci_cust_code      cust_code,
2 C.aci_cust_name cust_name,
3      R.NAME ruledefination,
4 B.RULECODE ALERTS,
5 A.custom1 tran_id,
6 TD_get_value('AMLTRANTYPE', RTRIM(A.custom17)) trantype,
7 A.CUSTOM18 tran_nature,
8 A.custom25 tran_date,
9 A.messageno messageno,
10 TD_get_value('AMLTRANSTATUS', A.status) msgstatus,
11 D.acai_acct_type acct_type,
12 A.custom19 acct_number,
13 A.CURRENCY CURRENCY,
14 A.priorityamount amount,
15 A.operator USERNAME,
16 A.msgdb_id msgdb_id,
17 A.msg_mode_in msg_mode_in
18 FROM MSGDB A,
19 MSGALERTS B,
20 AML_CUST_INFO C,
21      AML_CUST_ACC_INFO D,
22 RULETBL2 R,
23           (SELECT tdkey FROM tabledetails WHERE tdidcode = 'AML-INCLUDEQ' ) amlqueues
24 WHERE A.msgdb_id = B.msgdb_id AND
25 A.queueid = amlqueues.tdkey AND
26           A.MSG_MODE_IN = 'AML-TRANS' AND
27 A.custom15 = C.aci_cust_code AND
28 A.CUSTOM19=D.ACAI_ACCT_NUMBER(+) AND
29 TO_CHAR(A.custom25,'YYYYMMDD') BETWEEN
30      TO_CHAR(TO_DATE('2011/01/01','YYYY/MM/DD'),'YYYYMMDD')
31 AND TO_CHAR(TO_DATE('2011/01/31','YYYY/MM/DD'),'YYYYMMDD')
32 AND B.RULECODE = R.RULECODE
33 ORDER BY A.custom25, msgdb_id,B.rulecode;
Explained.
PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
Plan hash value: 1081661146
| Id | Operation | Name | Rows | Bytes |TempSpc| Cost (%CPU)| Time |
| 0 | SELECT STATEMENT | | 173K| 30M| | 12697 (2)| 00:02:33 |
| 1 | SORT ORDER BY | | 173K| 30M| 66M| 12697 (2)| 00:02:33 |
|* 2 | HASH JOIN | | 173K| 30M| | 5580 (4)| 00:01:07 |
| 3 | VIEW | index$_join$_005 | 3395 | 81480 | | 42 (3)| 00:00:01 |
|* 4 | HASH JOIN | | | | | | |
| 5 | INDEX FAST FULL SCAN | IDX_RCODE | 3395 | 81480 | | 10 (0)| 00:00:01 |
| 6 | INDEX FAST FULL SCAN | SYS_C0040836 | 3395 | 81480 | | 31 (0)| 00:00:01 |
|* 7 | HASH JOIN | | 1737 | 276K| | 5534 (4)| 00:01:07 |
|* 8 | HASH JOIN | | 559 | 86645 | | 4575 (3)| 00:00:55 |
|* 9 | HASH JOIN OUTER | | 448 | 56000 | | 4463 (3)| 00:00:54 |
| 10 | NESTED LOOPS | | 448 | 47040 | | 4404 (3)| 00:00:53 |
|* 11 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID| MSGDB | 451 | 35178 | | 4403 (3)| 00:00:53 |
|* 12 | INDEX RANGE SCAN | I_MODEDATE | 2292 | | | 4323 (3)| 00:00:52 |
|* 13 | INDEX UNIQUE SCAN | PK_TABLEDETAIL | 1 | 27 | | 0 (0)| 00:00:01 |
| 14 | INDEX FAST FULL SCAN | ACC_NUMBER_TYPE | 58947 | 1151K| | 58 (4)| 00:00:01 |
| 15 | TABLE ACCESS FULL | AML_CUST_INFO | 18340 | 537K| | 111 (1)| 00:00:02 |
| 16 | TABLE ACCESS FULL | MSGALERTS | 868K| 6782K| | 944 (4)| 00:00:12 |
There is no index on RULECODE of MSGALERTS and RULETBL2 table.
Could yu guys guide me how to tune this query with or without creating any new index.
Thanks,

To emphasise what hoek has said regarding dates, NEVER compare dates with dates by converting them to strings (or numbers). By doing so, you remove vital information from the optimizer.
For example, what is the difference between "31st Dec 2010" and "1st Jan 2011"? Easy, they're dates, that's 1 day.
But what's the difference between "20101231" and "20110101"? Easy: 20110101 - 20101231 = 8870.
That makes the difference between the optimizer guessing 1 row or 8870 rows... a fairly big difference, I think you'll agree, which could well impact on the plan the optimizer chooses.
One other point - leaving the clause as dates gives:
AND    a.custom25 BETWEEN TO_DATE('2011/01/01', 'YYYY/MM/DD')
                      AND TO_DATE('2011/01/31', 'YYYY/MM/DD') which excludes any dates on 31st Jan 2011 except midnight, eg. 10am on 31st Jan 2011 won't be returned by your query.
If you're after rows for a given month, then you could do:
AND    trunc(a.custom25, 'mm') = TO_DATE('01/01/2011', 'dd/mm/yyyy')

Help needed to tune the Query:Statistics added

Can someone DBA please help me to tune this query:
SELECT DISTINCT K.ATTRIBUTE_VALUE AGENCY_ID,B.PROFILE_NM ,NVL(G.OFFICE_DESC,'--') OFFICE_DESC,f.OFFICE_ID,B.PROFILE_ID,'%' ROLE,'%' LAYOUT,
CASE
WHEN 'flagB' = '%' THEN
NVL(J.ISS_GRP_DESC,'BILLING')
WHEN 'flagO' = '%' THEN
NVL(J.ISS_GRP_DESC,'ORDERING')
WHEN 'flag' = '%' THEN
NVL(J.ISS_GRP_DESC,'BILLING/ORDERING')
ELSE
NVL(J.ISS_GRP_DESC,' ')
END ISS_GRP_DESC,
DECODE(NVL(H.USERID,' ') ,' ','--','<a sbcuid_in=' || H.USERID || ' target=NEW >'||H.FIRSTNAME || ' ' || H.LASTNAME || '( ' || H.USERID || ' )</a>' ) USER_NAME
FROM
PROFILE_PORTAL B ,
TBL_BDA_AGENCY_RESP_REP C ,
TBL_BDA_AGENCY_OFFICE F,
TBL_BDA_OFFICE G,
USERS_PORTAL H,
TBL_BDA_USR_ISS_GRP I ,
TBL_BDA_ISS_GROUP J,
ATTRIBUTE_VALUES_PORTAL K,
PROFILE_TYPE_PORTAL L
WHERE
B.PROFILE_ID = F.AGENCY_ID (+)
AND B.PROFILE_ID = C.AGENCY_ID (+)
AND G.OFFICE_ID (+)= F.OFFICE_ID
AND H.USERID (+)= C.RESP_USR_ID
AND C.ISS_GRP_ID = I.ISS_GRP_ID (+)
AND I.ISS_GRP_ID = J.ISS_GRP_ID(+)
AND 'PROFILE.'||B.PROFILE_ID = K.ENTITY_ID(+)
AND K.ATTRIBUTE_VALUE IS NOT NULL
AND L.PROFILE_TYPE_ID = B.PROFILE_TYPE_ID
AND L.APPLICATION_CD='BDA'
AND NOT EXISTS (SELECT agency_id
FROM TBL_BDA_AGENCY_RESP_REP t
WHERE t.ISS_GRP_ID IN ('%')
AND t.AGENCY_ID = C.AGENCY_ID)
AND K.ATTRIBUTE_VALUE LIKE '%'
AND UPPER(B.PROFILE_NM) LIKE UPPER('%')
AND (to_char(NVL(B.PROFILE_ID,0)) LIKE '%' OR NVL(B.PROFILE_ID,0) IN ('a'))
AND NVL(G.OFFICE_ID,0) IN ('%')
AND (to_char(NVL(C.RESP_USR_ID,'0')) LIKE '%' OR NVL(C.RESP_USR_ID,'0') IN ('k'))
ORDER BY PROFILE_NM
The number of rows in these tables are as follows:
PROFILE_PORTAL -- 2392
TBL_BDA_AGENCY_RESP_REP 3508
TBL_BDA_AGENCY_OFFICE 2151
TBL_BDA_OFFICE 3
USERS_PORTAL 270500
TBL_BDA_USR_ISS_GRP 234
TBL_BDA_ISS_GROUP 2
ATTRIBUTE_VALUES_PORTAL 2790
PROFILE_TYPE_PORTAL 3
The Explain pal nhas given this o/p to me:
SQL> select * from table(dbms_xplan.display) dual;
PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
| Id | Operation | Name | Rows | Bytes |TempSpc| Cost |
| 0 | SELECT STATEMENT | | 807 | 102K| | 2533 |
| 1 | SORT UNIQUE | | 807 | 102K| 232K| 82 |
|* 2 | FILTER | | | | | |
|* 3 | HASH JOIN OUTER | | 807 | 102K| | 52 |
|* 4 | HASH JOIN OUTER | | 807 | 95226 | | 40 |
|* 5 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID | ATTRIBUTE_VALUES | 1 | 23 | | 2 |
| 6 | NESTED LOOPS | | 7 | 805 | | 37 |
| 7 | NESTED LOOPS OUTER | | 6 | 552 | | 25 |
|* 8 | FILTER | | | | | |
| 9 | NESTED LOOPS OUTER | | | | | |
|* 10 | FILTER | | | | | |
| 11 | NESTED LOOPS OUTER | | | | | |
| 12 | NESTED LOOPS OUTER | | 3 | 141 | | 10 |
|* 13 | HASH JOIN | | 3 | 120 | | 7 |
|* 14 | TABLE ACCESS FULL | PROFILE | 6 | 198 | | 4 |
|* 15 | TABLE ACCESS FULL | PROFILE_TYPE | 1 | 7 | | 2 |
|* 16 | INDEX RANGE SCAN | SYS_C0019777 | 1 | 7 | | 1 |
| 17 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID| TBL_BDA_OFFICE | 1 | 10 | | 1 |
|* 18 | INDEX UNIQUE SCAN | SYS_C0019800 | 1 | | | |
| 19 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID | TBL_BDA_AGENCY_RESP_REP | 2 | 26 | | 2 |
|* 20 | INDEX RANGE SCAN | IDX_AGECYRESP_AGNCYID | 2 | | | 1 |
| 21 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID | USER_ | 1 | 22 | | 1 |
|* 22 | INDEX UNIQUE SCAN | USER_PK | 1 | | | |
|* 23 | INDEX RANGE SCAN | IDX_ATTVAL_ENTATTID | 1 | | | 1 |
| 24 | TABLE ACCESS FULL | TBL_BDA_USR_ISS_GRP | 234 | 702 | | 2 |
| 25 | TABLE ACCESS FULL | TBL_BDA_ISS_GROUP | 2 | 24 | | 2 |
|* 26 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID | TBL_BDA_AGENCY_RESP_REP | 1 | 7 | | 3 |
|* 27 | INDEX RANGE SCAN | IDX_AGECYRESP_AGNCYID | 2 | | | 1 |
Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
2 - filter( NOT EXISTS (SELECT /*+ */ 0 FROM "TBL_BDA_AGENCY_RESP_REP" "T" WHERE "T"."AGENCY_ID"=:B1
AND "T"."ISS_GRP_ID"=TO_NUMBER('%')))
3 - access("I"."ISS_GRP_ID"="J"."ISS_GRP_ID"(+))
4 - access("SYS_ALIAS_1"."ISS_GRP_ID"="I"."ISS_GRP_ID"(+))
5 - filter("K"."ATTRIBUTE_VALUE" IS NOT NULL AND "K"."ATTRIBUTE_VALUE" LIKE '%')
8 - filter(NVL("SYS_ALIAS_1"."RESP_USR_ID",'0') LIKE '%' OR NVL("SYS_ALIAS_1"."RESP_USR_ID",'0')='k')
10 - filter(NVL("G"."OFFICE_ID",0)=TO_NUMBER('%'))
13 - access("L"."PROFILE_TYPE_ID"="B"."PROFILE_TYPE_ID")
14 - filter(UPPER("B"."PROFILE_NM") LIKE '%' AND (TO_CHAR(NVL("B"."PROFILE_ID",0)) LIKE '%' OR
NVL("B"."PROFILE_ID",0)=TO_NUMBER('a')))
15 - filter("L"."APPLICATION_CD"='BDA')
16 - access("B"."PROFILE_ID"="F"."AGENCY_ID"(+))
18 - access("G"."OFFICE_ID"(+)="F"."OFFICE_ID")
20 - access("B"."PROFILE_ID"="SYS_ALIAS_1"."AGENCY_ID"(+))
22 - access("H"."USERID"(+)="SYS_ALIAS_1"."RESP_USR_ID")
23 - access("K"."ENTITY_ID"='PROFILE.'||TO_CHAR("B"."PROFILE_ID"))
26 - filter("T"."ISS_GRP_ID"=TO_NUMBER('%'))
27 - access("T"."AGENCY_ID"=:B1)
Note: cpu costing is off
57 rows selected.
Elapsed: 00:00:01.08
Please help me.
Aashish S.

Hello Eric,
Here is the code:
SELECT DISTINCT
K.ATTRIBUTE_VALUE AGENCY_ID,
B.PROFILE_NM ,
NVL(G.OFFICE_DESC,'--') OFFICE_DESC,
f.OFFICE_ID,
B.PROFILE_ID,
'%' ROLE,
'%' LAYOUT,
case
WHEN 'flagB' = '%' THEN
NVL(J.ISS_GRP_DESC,'BILLING')
WHEN 'flagO' = '%' THEN
NVL(J.ISS_GRP_DESC,'ORDERING')
WHEN 'flag' = '%' THEN
NVL(J.ISS_GRP_DESC,'BILLING/ORDERING')
else
NVL(J.ISS_GRP_DESC,' ')
END ISS_GRP_DESC,
DECODE(NVL(H.USERID,' ') ,' ','--','<a sbcuid_in=' || H.USERID || ' target=NEW >'||H.FIRSTNAME || ' ' || H.LASTNAME ||
'( ' || H.USERID || ' )</a>' ) USER_NAME
from
PROFILE_PORTAL B ,
TBL_BDA_AGENCY_RESP_REP C ,
TBL_BDA_AGENCY_OFFICE F,
TBL_BDA_OFFICE G,
USERS_PORTAL H,
TBL_BDA_USR_ISS_GRP I ,
TBL_BDA_ISS_GROUP J,
ATTRIBUTE_VALUES_PORTAL K,
PROFILE_TYPE_PORTAL L
WHERE
B.PROFILE_ID = F.AGENCY_ID (+)
AND B.PROFILE_ID = C.AGENCY_ID (+)
AND G.OFFICE_ID (+)= F.OFFICE_ID
AND H.USERID (+)= C.RESP_USR_ID
AND C.ISS_GRP_ID = I.ISS_GRP_ID (+)
AND I.ISS_GRP_ID = J.ISS_GRP_ID(+)
AND 'PROFILE.'||B.PROFILE_ID = K.ENTITY_ID(+)
AND K.ATTRIBUTE_VALUE IS NOT NULL
AND L.PROFILE_TYPE_ID = B.PROFILE_TYPE_ID
AND L.APPLICATION_CD='BDA'
AND NOT EXISTS
(SELECT agency_id
FROM TBL_BDA_AGENCY_RESP_REP t
WHERE t.ISS_GRP_ID IN (1)
AND t.AGENCY_ID = C.AGENCY_ID)
AND K.ATTRIBUTE_VALUE LIKE '%'
AND UPPER(B.PROFILE_NM) LIKE UPPER('%')
AND (to_char(NVL(B.PROFILE_ID,0))
LIKE '%'
OR NVL(B.PROFILE_ID,0) IN (1))
AND NVL(G.OFFICE_ID,0) IN (1)
AND (to_char(NVL(C.RESP_USR_ID,'0'))
LIKE '%'
OR NVL(C.RESP_USR_ID,'0') IN ('%'))
ORDER BY PROFILE_NM
This is the Query and the query takes some mins. to run in prod environment.
From the Query plan ,I am not able to get any idea for optimization.
Now,Can you tell me which steps I need to follow to run it faster and which all modifications should be made?
Thanks.
Aashish S.

Hierarchical query with where clause

Hi,
How can I query hierarchically a query with WHERE clause? I have a table with three fields session_id,id and root_id.
When I try with the following query,
select id, level from relation
where session_id = 79977
connect by prior id = root_id start with id = 5042;
It gets duplicate values.
I want the query to show in the hierarchical manner with a filter condition using WHERE clause. Please help me how can I achieve this. If you know any link that describes more about this, please send it.
Thanks in Advance.
Regards,
-Parmy

Hi Sridhar Murthy an others,
Thanks a lot for your/the answer. It's working for me. It saved a lot of other work around without the proper knowledge of hierarchical query. Please send me any link that describes these issues in detail and also I hope as I have mentioned in the other message, same cannot be achieved on views or ( on two different tables ???)
Any way thanks for your reply,
It's working for me.
With happiness,
-Parmy

Outer join on query with OR clause

hi all, i am having problem outerjoining a query with or clause
here is my data
WITH table1 AS
SELECT 'test' txt1, 'pak' txt2, 'ced' txt3, 'su' txt4 FROM dual UNION ALL
SELECT null txt1, 'pak' txt2, 'ced2' txt3, 'su2' txt4 FROM dual UNION ALL
SELECT null txt1, NULL txt2, 'ced3' txt3, 'su3' txt4 FROM dual UNION ALL
SELECT null txt1, NULL txt2, null txt3, 'su3' txt4 FROM dual UNION ALL
SELECT 'text5' txt1, NULL txt2, null txt3, 'su3' txt4 FROM dual UNION ALL
SELECT null txt1, NULL txt2, null txt3, null txt4 FROM dual
,table2 AS
SELECT 111 pid, 'test' txt1, 'pak4' txt2, 'ced' txt3, 'su' txt4 FROM dual UNION ALL
SELECT 222 pid, 'test1' txt1, 'pak' txt2, 'ced2' txt3, 'su2' txt4 FROM dual UNION ALL
SELECT 333 pid, 'test2' txt1, 'pak3' txt2, 'ced3' txt3, 'su4' txt4 FROM dual UNION ALL
SELECT 444 pid, 'test2' txt1, 'pak3' txt2, 'ced4' txt3, 'su3' txt4 FROM dual
SELECT b.pid, a.*
from table1 a, table2 b
WHERE (a.txt1 = b.txt1 OR
       a.txt1 IS NULL AND a.txt2=b.txt2 OR
       Nvl(a.txt2, a.txt1) IS NULL AND a.txt3 = b.txt3 OR
       Nvl(a.txt2, a.txt1) IS NULL AND a.txt3 IS NULL AND a.txt4 = b.txt4
       ) as you can see i am joining table1 and table 2. i am joining with txt1, if txt1 is null then join by txt2, if null then join by txt3 and so on.
the code above product this output
PID     TXT1     TXT2     TXT3     TXT4
===     ====     ===   ==== ====
111     test     pak      ced     su
222             pak      ced2     su2
333                     ced3     su3
444                          su3this output is partially correct. only 4 rows were display and two was left out
SELECT 'text5' txt1, NULL txt2, null txt3, 'su3' txt4 FROM dual UNION ALL
SELECT null txt1, NULL txt2, null txt3, null txt4 FROM dual i tried using outer join but oracle complain that i cannot use outerjoin with OR clause.
can someone help modify my query to display the output below ?
PID     TXT1     TXT2     TXT3     TXT4
===    ====      ===   ==== ====
111     test     pak      ced     su
222             pak      ced2     su2
333                     ced3     su3
444                          su3
NULL NULL   NULL    NULL   NULL
     test5

Not sure you can do it with the Oracle style outer joins, but wioth ANSI style joins it is simple, actually exactly as you had it.
SQL> set null null;
SQL> WITH table1 AS (
2   SELECT 'test' txt1, 'pak' txt2, 'ced' txt3, 'su' txt4 FROM dual UNION ALL
3   SELECT null txt1, 'pak' txt2, 'ced2' txt3, 'su2' txt4 FROM dual UNION ALL
4   SELECT null txt1, NULL txt2, 'ced3' txt3, 'su3' txt4 FROM dual UNION ALL
5   SELECT null txt1, NULL txt2, null txt3, 'su3' txt4 FROM dual UNION ALL
6   SELECT 'text5' txt1, NULL txt2, null txt3, 'su3' txt4 FROM dual UNION ALL
7   SELECT null txt1, NULL txt2, null txt3, null txt4 FROM dual),
8 table2 AS (
9   SELECT 111 pid, 'test' txt1, 'pak4' txt2, 'ced' txt3, 'su' txt4 FROM dual UNION ALL
10   SELECT 222 pid, 'test1' txt1, 'pak' txt2, 'ced2' txt3, 'su2' txt4 FROM dual UNION ALL
11   SELECT 333 pid, 'test2' txt1, 'pak3' txt2, 'ced3' txt3, 'su4' txt4 FROM dual UNION ALL
12   SELECT 444 pid, 'test2' txt1, 'pak3' txt2, 'ced4' txt3, 'su3' txt4 FROM dual)
13 SELECT b.pid, a.*
14 from table1 a
15     LEFT JOIN table2 b
16        ON (a.txt1 = b.txt1 OR
17            a.txt1 IS NULL AND a.txt2=b.txt2 OR
18            Nvl(a.txt2, a.txt1) IS NULL AND a.txt3 = b.txt3 OR
19            Nvl(a.txt2, a.txt1) IS NULL AND a.txt3 IS NULL AND a.txt4 = b.txt4);
       PID TXT1   TXT2   TXT3   TXT4
       111 test   pak    ced    su
       222 null   pak    ced2   su2
       333 null   null   ced3   su3
       444 null   null   null   su3
null       text5 null   null   su3
null       null   null   null   nullJohn

How Can I increase performance of Query with Distinct Keyword

Dear Experts,
In my Query when I execute this without Distinct it give result very soon,
But when I excute this with Distinct its performance is very slow is there any option for increase the performance with Distinct .
I have to use Distinct according to our rewuirement.

neither DISTINCT nor GROUP BY do sort. If you need to sort, use ORDER BY. Slight correction, they do a sort, but your results are not guarenteed to be sorted.
The overhead of a sort is incurred, if your results is large enough (my test below isn't) you will be sorting to disk. Which as we all know can be very slow.
9i:
SQL> SET TRIMSPOOL ON
SQL> CREATE TABLE D (A VARCHAR2(2));
Table created.
SQL> INSERT INTO D (A) SELECT DBMS_RANDOM.STRING('U',2) FROM DUAL CONNECT BY LEVEL <= 5000;
5000 rows created.
SQL> COMMIT;
Commit complete.
SQL> SET AUTOTRACE TRACEONLY EXPLAIN;
SQL> SELECT DISTINCT A FROM D;
Execution Plan
   0      SELECT STATEMENT Optimizer=CHOOSE
   1    0   SORT (UNIQUE)
   2    1     TABLE ACCESS (FULL) OF 'D'
SQL> SELECT A FROM D GROUP BY A;
Execution Plan
   0      SELECT STATEMENT Optimizer=CHOOSE
   1    0   SORT (GROUP BY)
   2    1     TABLE ACCESS (FULL) OF 'D'
SQL> SELECT DISTINCT A FROM D ORDER BY A;
Execution Plan
   0      SELECT STATEMENT Optimizer=CHOOSE
   1    0   SORT (UNIQUE)
   2    1     TABLE ACCESS (FULL) OF 'D'
SQL> SPOOL OFF10g
SQL> SET TRIMSPOOL ON
SQL> CREATE TABLE D (A VARCHAR2(2));
Table created.
SQL> INSERT INTO D (A) SELECT DBMS_RANDOM.STRING('U',2) FROM DUAL CONNECT BY LEVEL <= 5000;
5000 rows created.
SQL> COMMIT;
Commit complete.
SQL> SET AUTOTRACE TRACEONLY EXPLAIN;
SQL> SELECT DISTINCT A FROM D;
Execution Plan
Plan hash value: 3079699766
| Id | Operation          | Name | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT   |      | 5000 | 15000 |     7 (29)| 00:00:01 |
|   1 | HASH UNIQUE       |      | 5000 | 15000 |     7 (29)| 00:00:01 |
|   2 |   TABLE ACCESS FULL| D    | 5000 | 15000 |     5   (0)| 00:00:01 |
Note
   - dynamic sampling used for this statement
SQL> SELECT A FROM D GROUP BY A;
Execution Plan
Plan hash value: 2712634873
| Id | Operation          | Name | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT   |      | 5000 | 15000 |     7 (29)| 00:00:01 |
|   1 | HASH GROUP BY     |      | 5000 | 15000 |     7 (29)| 00:00:01 |
|   2 |   TABLE ACCESS FULL| D    | 5000 | 15000 |     5   (0)| 00:00:01 |
Note
   - dynamic sampling used for this statement
SQL> SELECT DISTINCT A FROM D ORDER BY A;
Execution Plan
Plan hash value: 1773491675
| Id | Operation          | Name | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT   |      | 5000 | 15000 |     8 (38)| 00:00:01 |
|   1 | SORT UNIQUE       |      | 5000 | 15000 |     7 (29)| 00:00:01 |
|   2 |   TABLE ACCESS FULL| D    | 5000 | 15000 |     5   (0)| 00:00:01 |
Note
   - dynamic sampling used for this statement
SQL> SPOOL OFF

Hosting company does not support SQL query with OUTFILE clause

From my mysql database, I want to allow the user to run a query and produce a csv / text file of our membership database. Unfortunately, I just found out my hosting company does not support the SQL query with OUTFILE clause for MySQL database.
Are there any other options available to produce a file besides me running the query in phpadmin and making the file available to users.
Thanks. George

Maybe this external Export Mysql data to CSV - PHP tutorial will be of help
Cheers,
Günter

Rewrite the query with out joins and group by

Hi,
This was an interview question.
Table Names: bookshelf_checkout
bookshelf
And the join condition between these two tables is title
We need to rewrite below query without using join condition and group by clause ?
SELECT b.title,max(bc.returned_date - bc.checkout_date) "Most Days Out"
           FROM bookshelf_checkout bc,bookshelf b
           WHERE bc.title(+)=b.title
           GROUP BY b.title;When I was in college, I read that most of the SELECT statements can be replaced by basic SQL operations (SET OPERATORS). Now I am trying to rewrite the query with SET operators but not able to get the exact result.
Kindly help me on this.
Thanks,
Suri

Something like this?
1 WITH books AS (
2 SELECT 'title 1' title FROM dual UNION ALL
3 SELECT 'title 2' FROM dual UNION ALL
4 SELECT 'title 3' FROM dual ),
5 bookshelf AS (
6 SELECT 'title 1' title, DATE '2012-05-01' checkout_date, DATE '2012-05-15' returned_date FROM dual UNION ALL
7 SELECT 'title 1' title, DATE '2012-05-16' checkout_date, DATE '2012-05-20' returned_date FROM dual UNION ALL
8 SELECT 'title 2' title, DATE '2012-04-01' checkout_date, DATE '2012-05-15' returned_date FROM dual )
9 SELECT bs.title, MAX(bs.returned_date - bs.checkout_date) OVER (PARTITION BY title) FROM bookshelf bs
10 UNION
11 (SELECT b.title, NULL FROM books b
12 MINUS
13* SELECT bs.title, NULL FROM bookshelf bs)
SQL> /
TITLE   MAX(BS.RETURNED_DATE-BS.CHECKOUT_DATE)OVER(PARTITIONBYTITLE)
title 1                                                           14
title 2                                                           44
title 3Lukasz

How to tune the query...?

Hi all,
I am having a table with millions of records and the query is taking hours
time. How to tune the query apart from doing the following things.
1. Creating or Deleting indexes.
2. Using Bind variables.
3. Using Hints.
4. Updating the Statitics regurarly.
Actually, i have asked this question in interview how to tune the query.
I told him the above 4 things. Then he told, these are not working, then
how you will tune this query.
Thanks in advance,
Pal

user546710 wrote:
Actually, i have asked this question in interview how to tune the query.
I told him the above 4 things. Then he told, these are not working, then
how you will tune this query.It actually depends on the scenario/problem given.
You may want to read this first.
When your query takes too long ...
When your query takes too long ...
HOW TO: Post a SQL statement tuning request - template posting
HOW TO: Post a SQL statement tuning request - template posting

How to tune the query and difference between CBO AND RBO.. Which is good

Hello Friends,
Here are some questions I have pls reply back with complete description and url if any ..
1)How Did you tune Query,
2)What approach you take to tune query? Do you use Hints?
3)Where did you tune the query and what are the issue with query?
4)What is difference between RBO and CBO? where u use RBO and CBO.
5)Give some information about hash join?
6) Using explain plan how do u know where the bottle neck in query .. how u will identify where the bottle neck is from explain plan .
thanks/Kumar

Hi,
kumar73 wrote:
Hello Friends,
Here are some questions I have pls reply back with complete description and url if any ..
1)How Did you tune Query, Use EXPLAIN PLAN to see exactly where it is spending its time, and address those areas.
See the forum FAQ
SQL and PL/SQL FAQ
"3. How to improve the performance of my query?"
2)What approach you take to tune query? Do you use Hints?Hints can help.
Even more helpful is writing the SQL efficiently (avoiding multiple scans of the same table, filtering early, using built-in rather than user-defined functions, ...), creating and using indexes, and, for large tables, partitioning.
Table design can have a big impact on performace.
Look for ways to do part of what you need before the query. This includes denormalizing (when appropriate), the kind of pre-digesting that often takes place in data warehouses, function-based indexes, and, starting in Oracle 11, virtual columns.
3)Where did you tune the query and what are the issue with query?Either this question is a vague summary of the entire thread, or I don't understand it. Can you re-phrase this part?
4)What is difference between RBO and CBO? where u use RBO and CBO.Basically, use RBO if you have Oracle 7 or earlier.

Undo_tablespace and undo_retetion or tune the query which one to increase

hi all,
In my logs file s
ORA-01555 caused by SQL statement below (SQL ID: 9nc0n06yryhbk, Query Duration=165122 sec, SCN: 0x05ff.062f3363):
Tue Feb 5 02:26:39 2008
SELECT /*+ FIRST_ROWS */ /*+ ORDERED */ B.GID ,K.ELEMENT_TYPE ,K.DATA_SOURCE_GID ,K.PROD_ID ,K.OPTION_CD ,K.MCC ,K.SPN ,K.REGION_CD ,K.WW_CD ,K.COUNTRY_CD ,K.ERROR ,B.GBATCH_ID
,B.PERIOD_SEQ_NUM ,B.ACTION ,B.ERROR B_ERROR ,B.COST ,B.INPUT_FILE_ROW_NUM ,B.ACTION_STATUS ,B.ACTION_TIMESTAMP FROM T_INPUT_BUCKET B, T_COS_INPUT_KEY K WHERE B.ACTION_STATUS =
'initial' AND B.GINPUT_KEY_ID = K.GID AND B.GBATCH_ID = :B1 AND ROWNUM < 8001
Tue Feb 5 02:35:21 2008
Thread 2 advanced to log sequence 42907
Mon Feb 4 09:10:55 2008
ORA-01555 caused by SQL statement below (SQL ID: 9nc0n06yryhbk, Query Duration=104081 sec, SCN: 0x05ff.05ebc008):
Mon Feb 4 09:10:55 2008
SELECT /*+ FIRST_ROWS */ /*+ ORDERED */ B.GID ,K.ELEMENT_TYPE ,K.DATA_SOURCE_GID ,K.PROD_ID ,K.OPTION_CD ,K.MCC ,K.SPN ,K.REGION_CD ,K.WW_CD ,K.COUNTRY_CD ,K.ERROR ,B.GBATCH_ID
,B.PERIOD_SEQ_NUM ,B.ACTION ,B.ERROR B_ERROR ,B.COST ,B.INPUT_FILE_ROW_NUM ,B.ACTION_STATUS ,B.ACTION_TIMESTAMP FROM T_INPUT_BUCKET B, T_COS_INPUT_KEY K WHERE B.ACTION_STATUS =
'initial' AND B.GINPUT_KEY_ID = K.GID AND B.GBATCH_ID = :B1 AND ROWNUM < 8001
Mon Feb 4 09:14:08 2008
===============================================
and my undo_retention
Current usage:
UNDO_01 96736 11596 12 88
UNDO_02 96736 9357 10 90
NAME TYPE VALUE
undo_management string AUTO
undo_retention integer 36000
can anyone please guide me which one is best to increase undo_retention or undo_tablespace
or tune the query?
my database version is
Oracle Database 10g Enterprise Edition Release 10.2.0.2.0 - 64bi
PL/SQL Release 10.2.0.2.0 - Production
"CORE 10.2.0.2.0 Production"
TNS for HPUX: Version 10.2.0.2.0 - Production
NLSRTL Version 10.2.0.2.0 - Production
thanks in advance

IMO best is to
1) tune the query to minimize time and resource use;
2) set the undo_retention to size the undo tablespace for the required 'consistent read' rebuild requirements;
3) set the retention guarantee appropriately
4) size the undo tablespace based on the required size, probably dictated by 2)
Why is this an 'either one or other' question? When driving a car and looking for best fuel efficiency, you tune up the car, drive properly AND use the right fuel. You don't just pick one and leave it at that.

How to tune the query for duplicate records while joining the two tables

hi,i am executing the query which has retrieving multiple tables,in which one of them has duplicate record,how to get single record

Not enough info...subject says "tune" the query, message says "write" the query...and where is actual query that you had tried ?

Tunning the Query with Distinct Clause

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for