What is use of index by binaary_integer

Hi All,
I have created to program of collection where we use index by binaary_integer in one program and not use index by binaary_integer in second program, but result is same, any body help me what is use of index by binaary_integer here
1- Declare
Type emp_table_type is table of
emp%rowtype index by binary_integer;
my_emp_table emp_table_type;
Begin
select * bulk collect into my_emp_table from emp;
for i in my_emp_table.first..my_emp_table.last
loop
dbms_output.put_line(my_emp_table(i).ename);
end loop;
end;
2- Declare
Type emp_table_type is table of
emp%rowtype;
my_emp_table emp_table_type;
Begin
select * bulk collect into my_emp_table from emp;
for i in my_emp_table.first..my_emp_table.last
loop
dbms_output.put_line(my_emp_table(i).ename);
end loop;
end;
your suggestion would be greatly appreciated.

here is one for you.
http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/E11882_01/appdev.112/e17126/composites.htm#CHDEIDIC

Similar Messages

What is the use of Indexes in ODS&Infocube??

What is the use of Indexes in ODS&Infocube??

An Index can improve the reading performance when data is searched for values of fileds contained in the index.
The fact whether the Index is used or not depends on the database optimizer, which decides it after taking the following under consideration:
- Size of the table
- Fields in the index compared to the fields in the statement
- The quality of the index (its clustering factor)
One backdraw of Index is that they decrease writing performance, as they are maintained during the write to the table.
Hope it helps you,
Gilad

How to use cfloop index value as part of another variable

Hello,
I have a RATE form that first asks "how many rates will you
be adding?" that answer generates a series of form elements based
on the answer. You then have a form grid to populate, 3 values for
each rate (price, code, name).
This part works fine. The issue is now I need to INSERT the
values into the table, so I need to use the INDEX value of the
cfloop to recreate the amount (and names) of the fields in the
INSERT statement. How do I escape, or re-create the evaluated form
elements ( in which their count is #i# as the loop goes) when I
need to evaluate for #i# AND evaluate for #form.sku_i_name# at the
same pass?
I am passing, for example, #form.sku_2_Name# where that might
equal "Half Page". The number 2 in that variable was assigned
during the form creation by the current index of a cfloop. Since my
action (insert) page does not know how many (out of 50 possible)
sku's are coming, how do I use the skuCount (another hidden value
passed as well) to create a proper INSERT SQL command when I need
to eval the form element and the index at the same time?
Obviously #sku_#i#_Name# does not work, and #sku_i_Name# does
not either... I know this can be done, and that I am just doing it
wrong.
Thanks for any help!

bigbrain28 wrote:
> Thank You, cfsearching! I don't quite understand 100%
how it works
As all three of us indicated you use array notation for this
type of
requirement. In ColdFusion you can use array notation or dot
notation
to access structure data. Almost all data in ColdFusion is
now some
type of structure.
I.E. #Form['myField']# is the same as #Form.myField#.
The advantage is that with array notation you can do things
you can not
do with dot notation. You can reference elements that have
keys that
are illegal variable names such as one with a space.
I.E. #url['my field'] is allowed, #url.my field# would fail
or course.
And you can concatenate the key string as we did with your
example.
I.E. #Form['aString' & aVariable]#
There are many powerful things one can do with this
knowledge. One can
access record sets with array notations. This can allow for
very
sophisticated parsing of a record set.
I.E. #myQuery['column'][row]#
You can dynamical call a variable. Thus creating dynamic code
that does
not even need to know what variables exist until run time.
I.E. #variables[anyName]#
This just scratches the surface.

WHat is the best index type for non uniqueness / Varchar columns in SQL 2008 R2

Hello All Greetings,
Please help me here with my doubt,
in my table i have two columns about a million rows, it has about 20 columns in it, three columns with name as Period, Gender so most of the time these two columns use in where clause,
Gender will contain Either M or F , Period contains YYYY-Month (2013-December, 2013-August) etc so i would like to add a Index to these two columns so that in will increase the performance, so please let me know what type of indexes i need to add to
these columns in the table,
please note that only one time we will add data to the table which will take only 2 minutes but we query the table every day
so my question what is the best index type that i need to create on columns with non uniqueness values in the column.,
Thank you In Advance,
Milan

There is nothing whatever wrong with creating an index on a VARCHAR column, or set of columns.
Regarding the performance of VARCHAR/INT, as with everything in a RDBMS, it depends on what you are doing. What you may be thinking of is the fact that clustering a table on a VARCHAR key is (in SQL Server) marginally less efficient than clustering on a monotonically
increasing numerical key, and can introduce fragmentation.
Or you may be thinking of what you have heard about writing JOINs on VARCHAR columns - it is true, it is a little less efficient than a JOIN on numeric type, but it is only a little less efficient, nothing that would lead you to never join on varchar cols.
None of this does not mean that you should not create indexes on VARCHAR columns. A needed index on a VARCHAR column will boost query performance, often by orders of magnitude. If you need an index on a VARCHAR, create it. It makes no sense to try to find an
integer column to create the index on - the engine will never use it.
Check this reference: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/14041481/is-it-good-to-create-a-nonclustered-index-on-a-column-of-type-varchar
Mark ANSWER if this reply resolves your query, If helpful then VOTE HELPFUL
INSQLSERVER.COM
Mohammad Nizamuddin

How to use the index method for pathpoints object in illustrator through javascripts

hii...
am using Illustrator CS2 using javascripts...
how to use the index method for pathpoints object in illustrator through javascripts..

Hi, what are you trying to do with path points?
CarlosCanto

How do I use the Index Values property node with a multidimensional array.

I am using a 2D array to store operator inputs on my front panel. I only want to display one element to the operator at a time. I am trying to use the Index Values property node to change the displayed element. However, I can only get the Rows index to work. How do I direct the Columns index as well? The help says to use one per dimension. I need clarification on what this is talking about. I've tried adding a second element to the property node, 2 seperate property nodes, and diferent wiring techniques. (series, parallel)

If you only wire up one of the inputs (col or row) what you get out is a 1D array of either the column or row. If you wire controls to both, then you will get one element out of the array. Getting a single element in a 2D array requires you to specify both a row and column.
Message Edited by Dennis Knutson on 02-08-2007 08:34 AM
Attachments:
Index 2D Array.PNG ‏2 KB

Retrieving specific document using explicit index lookup

The best way to retrieve a specific document seems to be using XmlContainer::getDocument, thus using the default index.
However, I may not have the document name, but instead an ID I have defined a unique index for.
Of course, I can use the XQuery interface to retrieve the document, and it's fast.
It's faster, though, to directly use an index. I can use XmlContainer::lookupIndex in order to do this; it takes an optional parameter "value", and the documentation for 2.3.10 says: "Provides the value to which equality indices must be equal. This parameter is required when returning documents on equality indices, and it is ignored for all other types of indices."
However, the documentation also says that XmlContainer::lookupIndex is deprecated, "in favor of using XmlManager::createIndexLookup and XmlIndexLookup::execute". That recommended approach does not seem to provide a way to look up a specific value. It seems I have to iterate over the index, which is not what I want. Am I missing something?
Michael Ludwig

George,
thanks a lot - should have found this myself, I guess. Working example following:
use strict;
use warnings;
use Sleepycat::DbXml 'simple';
my $id = shift or die "usage: $0 <ID>\n";
my $contfile = $ENV{HOME} . '/dbenv/tv.dbxml';
my $iuri = ''; my $iname = 'ID';
my $istrat = 'unique-node-attribute-equality-decimal';
eval {
    my $mgr = XmlManager->new;
    my $cont = $mgr->openContainer($contfile, Db::DB_RDONLY);
    my $sval = XmlValue->new(XmlValue::DECIMAL, $id);
    my $idx = $mgr->createIndexLookup($cont, $iuri, $iname, $istrat, $sval);
    my $ctx = $mgr->createQueryContext(
        XmlQueryContext::LiveValues,
        XmlQueryContext::Lazy);
    my $res = $idx->execute($ctx);
    while ($res->hasNext) {
        $res->next(my $val);
        print $val;
my $ex;
if ($ex = catch XmlException) {
    die join "\n", ref $ex, $ex->what,
        'Exception Code: ' . $ex->getExceptionCode,
        'DbErrno: ' . $ex->getDbErrno;
elsif ($ex = catch std::exception) { die join "\n", ref $ex, $ex->what }
elsif ($@)                         { die $@ }For an alternative approach using setLowBound(), apply the following diff:
12c12,13
<     my $idx = $mgr->createIndexLookup($cont, $iuri, $iname, $istrat, $sval);
my $idx = $mgr->createIndexLookup($cont, $iuri, $iname, $istrat);
$idx->setLowBound( $sval, XmlIndexLookup::EQ );Thanks,
Michael

Selecting all columns makes oracle use more indexes than only selectng one?

I have 3 queries here that differ only slightly, conceptually, but the plans are massively different. What I cant work out is that the difference is only in the select list.. The fields referenced in the where clause are properly indexed for this purpose
SELECT
scc.expiry_date
FROM
bw3.int_file_log_details ifld
INNER JOIN
bw3.svc_card_status_change scsc
USING
    (institution_number, file_number)
INNER JOIN bw3.svc_client_cards scc
USING
    (card_number)
WHERE
institution_number = '00000001' AND
file_number = '00002504'This one above does a full table scan of SCC, over 3.5 million records
SELECT
card_number
FROM
bw3.int_file_log_details ifld
INNER JOIN
bw3.svc_card_status_change scsc
USING
    (institution_number, file_number)
INNER JOIN bw3.svc_client_cards scc
USING
    (card_number)
WHERE
institution_number = '00000001' AND
file_number = '00002504'This one above does an index fast full scan of SCC's pk (which is cardnumber), as does doing a "SELECT null as dummy FROM..."
SELECT
FROM
bw3.int_file_log_details ifld
INNER JOIN
bw3.svc_card_status_change scsc
USING
    (institution_number, file_number)
INNER JOIN bw3.svc_client_cards scc
USING
    (card_number)
WHERE
institution_number = '00000001' AND
file_number = '00002504'This one above does the index range scan of the columns mentioned in the where clause and two index unique scans to link in IFLD and SCC (because they are joined on their PKs)
I would expect all queries to run this way and completes in ~0.01 seconds
Now, I get that oracle will sometimes use only an index instead of a table access when the requested data can be got from the index, but the actual query is pulling data from some columns not in indexes, so must be accessed in the table:
SELECT
scsc.card_prod_data as "Field1",
substr(card_number,1,4)||' '||
    substr(card_number,5,4)||' '||
    substr(card_number,9,4)||' '||
    substr(card_number,13,4)||' '||
    substr(card_number,17) as "Field2",
'                           ' as "Field3",
scc.emboss_line_1 as "Field4",
scc.emboss_line_2 as "Field5",
TO_CHAR(TO_DATE(scc.last_issued_date, 'YYYYMMDD'), 'MM/YY ')||
    TO_CHAR(TO_DATE(scc.expiry_date, 'YYYYMMDD'), 'MM/YY ')||
    '    ' as "Field6",
'B'||
    card_number||
    '^'||
    RPAD('0', 27, ' ')||
    '^'||
    to_char(to_date(scc.expiry_date, 'YYYYMMDD'), 'YYMM')||
    service_category_code||
    '000000000000' as "Field7",
card_number||
    '='||
    to_char(to_date(scc.expiry_date, 'YYYYMMDD'), 'YYMM')||
    service_category_code||
    '000000000000' as "Field8",
card_number as "Field9",
scsc.cvv_cvc2 as "Field10"
FROM
bw3.int_file_log_details ifld
INNER JOIN
bw3.svc_card_status_change scsc
USING
    (institution_number, file_number)
INNER JOIN bw3.svc_client_cards scc
USING
    (card_number)
WHERE
institution_number = '00000001' AND
file_number = '00002504'This query above, which uses some data from all tables, does a table full scan of SCC, yet if I SELECT * FROM.. I get the expected index usage and table access by index rowid for all tables..
Why is oracle doing an FTS when I choose only some columns, yet doing index access when I select * ?
Edited by: charred on Oct 5, 2010 11:37 AM

Selectivity of indexes?
For a query linking these tables:
int_file_log_details <-> svc_card_status_change <-> svc_client_cards
I'm expecting Oracle to:
Use an index range scan of the index on svc_card_status_change that is a nonunique index of institution_number and file number. Selectivity of this index is:
1 institution number in the entire table
59 distinct file numbers in the entire table
4.1million records in the entire table
From there, with the records it found, to use index unique scan of the PKs of int_file_log_details (file_number: 1 record required) and PK of svc_client_cards (card_number: poetntially thousands of records required)
I can understand if oracle might decide it can get 69k records out of 4.1 million faster by FTS the cards table rather than having the indirection of the index... what I cannot understand is:
If I select all the data from the query (SELECT *) it does unique index scans for the 2 records
If I select say, only one non-indexed non-joined column from each table, oracle prefers a FTS of the cards table..
Is oracle not realising that there are only 2 records I need out of cards? Why would select * differ? Is it that oracle thinks "select * is a large amount of data, so it'll be faster to use the index and target certain rows" vs "select one_column can be garnered more quickly by scanning the table and generating a lower overall memory load" ?

Simple SQL Query is not using Bitmap index

Hello to All,
We are having Oracle9i Database and using it for the datawarehouse purpose.
I have created the bitmap index on calledinfo column and I am running the following simple query which takes serveral hours to complete:
select * from ssp.ssp_2006_q4 where calledinfo='799992515f'
OR
select calledinfo from ssp.ssp_2006_q4 where calledinfo='799992515f'
I don't know why it is not using the bitmap index: Can anybody help me here?
Thanks in Advance
Hashim

I know why and everyone that has read Jonathan Lewis' book on the CBO knows why.
Why? Because the CBO thinks the cost of using your index will be higher than the cost of ignoring it.
To see what Oracle is thinking run an explain plan using DBMS_XPLAN for create the output and then rerun it with a hint forcing index usage.
It is a mistake to believe that an index will always make things better. Issues of cardinality, clustering factor, etc. are very important.
Post the explain plans if you have any questions about what they show:
http://www.psoug.org/reference/explain_plan.html

Query uses wrong index

Hi,
I have exported and imported two schemas to a different server. Now when a user fires a select query it takes more time than before. When I saw the execution plan for some of 'select' queries,I found that the queries are using wrong index.This is the reason for the delayed reponse time.
Can anybody tell me why it happened ?
Now what should I do?
Can I force select query to use the right index?
Thanx in advance

Please find below details of the query and indexes. Do let me know if you need more information.
Query:
SELECT ROWID, warehouse_code, branch_code, client_code, job_srnum,
department, inventory_date, file_no, client_carton_no, description,
ref1, ref2, ref3, destruction_date, subject, pnw_carton_no,
cre_user_id, cre_dt, upd_user_id, branch, upd_dt, status, date1,
date2, num1, carton_size, addendum_date
FROM ISTORET.rmst_inventory_details2
WHERE branch_code = 'BOM'
AND job_srnum = '62100113476'
AND client_carton_no = 'BM4060394822'
AND subject = 'FILES'
ORDER BY file_no
Execution Plan:
Operation Object Name Rows Bytes Cost
SELECT STATEMENT Optimizer Mode=CHOOSE 1 15
SORT ORDER BY 1 155 15
TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID ISTORET.RMST_INVENTORY_DETAILS2 1 155 5
INDEX RANGE SCAN ISTORET.BRC_JOB_SUB_REF123_INDX 1 4
Query time: More than 5 mins
Same query with hint /*+ index(rmst_inventory_details2 BRC_JOB_CTN_FILE_INDX) */
SELECT STATEMENT Optimizer Mode=CHOOSE 1 6
TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID ISTORET.RMST_INVENTORY_DETAILS2 1 155 6
INDEX RANGE SCAN ISTORET.BRC_JOB_CTN_FILE_INDX 1 5
Query time: 110 msecs
Index details:
PARAMETER INDEX- 1 INDEX- 2
Table Owner ISTORET ISTORET
Table Name RMST_INVENTORY_DETAILS2 RMST_INVENTORY_DETAILS2
Index Name BRC_JOB_CTN_FILE_INDX BRC_JOB_SUB_REF123_INDX
Uniqueness NONUNIQUE NONUNIQUE
Columns BRANCH_CODE
JOB_SRNUM
CLIENT_CARTON_NO
FILE_NO BRANCH_CODE
JOB_SRNUM
SUBJECT
REF1
REF2
REF3
Table Type TABLE TABLE
Status VALID VALID
Tablespace ISTORET_RID2_INDX ISTORET_RID2_INDX
Initial Extent Size 4,194,304 4,194,304
Next Extent Size 4,194,304 4,194,304
Minimum Extents 1 1
Maximum Extents 2,147,483,645 2,147,483,645
Percent Increase 0 0
Distinct Keys 42,576,227 27,318,132
Percent Free 10 10
Index Type NORMAL NORMAL
Partitioned No No
Temporary No No
Join Index No No
Size in MB 2,456 2,140
Number Extents 614 535
Size in bytes 2,575,302,656 2,243,952,640
Last Analyzed 20/3/2007 20/3/2007

Why is Oracle not using the index??

Hi,
I have a table called 'arc_errors' which has an index on 'member_number' as follows:- Create/Recreate indexes
create index DWO.DW_ARC_CERRORS_MNO on DWO.DW_ARC_CERRORS (MEMBER_NUMBER);
But surpisingly, when I execute the following query, it does not use the index.
SELECT member_number,
COUNT(*) error_count
FROM arc_errors a
WHERE member_number = 68534152 AND
( tx_type = 'SDIC' AND
error_number IN (4, 7, 12, 13, 15, 17, 18, 705) )
OR
( tx_type = 'AUTH' AND
error_number IN (100, 104, 107, 111, 116) )
OR
( tx_type = 'BHO' AND
error_number IN (708,710) )
OR
( tx_type = 'XLGN' AND
( error_number BETWEEN 102 AND 105 OR
error_number BETWEEN 107 AND 120 OR
error_number BETWEEN 300 AND 304 ) )
OR
( tx_type = 'None' AND
( error_number IN (20, 112) OR
error_number BETWEEN 402 AND 421 ) )
OR
( tx_type = 'HYBR' AND
error_number IN (303, 304) )
GROUP BY member_number;
This is what 'explain plan' tell me
SELECT STATEMENT, GOAL = RULE               237907     502923     15087690
SORT GROUP BY               237907     502923     15087690
PARTITION RANGE ALL
TABLE ACCESS FULL     DWO     DW_ARC_CERRORS     237209     502923     15087690
Can someone tell me why a 'table acess full' is required here?
Thanks in advance,
Rajesh

Sorry, I just found the solution myself. I need to put an extra pair of braces around the set of conditions seperated by OR.

How to prevent Oracle from using an index when joining two tables ...

How to prevent Oracle from using an index when joining two tables to get an inline view which is used in an update statement?
O.K. I think I have to explain what I mean:
When joining two tables which have many entries sometimes it es better not to use an index on the column used as join criteria.
I have two tables: table A and table B.
Table A has 4.000.000 entries and table B has 700.000 entries.
I have a join of both tables with a numeric column as join criteria.
There is an index on this column in table A.
So I instead of
where (A.col = B.col)I want to use
where (A.col+0 = B.col)in order to prevent Oracle from using the index.
When I use the join in a select statement it works.
But when I use the join as inline view in an update statement I get the error ORA-01779.
When I remove the "+0" the update statement works. (The column col is unique in table B).
Any ideas why this happens?
Thank you very much in advance for any help.
Regards Hartmut

I think you should post an properly formatted explain plan output using DBMS_XPLAN.DISPLAY including the "Predicate Information" section below the plan to provide more details regarding your query resp. update statement. Please use the \[code\] and \[code\] tags to enhance readability of the output provided:
In SQL*Plus:
SET LINESIZE 130
EXPLAIN PLAN FOR <your statement>;
SELECT * FROM TABLE(DBMS_XPLAN.DISPLAY);Usually if you're using the CBO (cost based optimizer) and have reasonable statistics gathered on the database objects used the optimizer should be able to determine if it is better to use the existing index or not.
Things look different if you don't have statistics, you have outdated/wrong statistics or deliberately still use the RBO (rule based optimizer). In this case you would have to use other means to prevent the index usage, the most obvious would be the already mentioned NO_INDEX or FULL hint.
But I strongly recommend to check in first place why the optimizer apparently seems to choose an inappropriate index access path.
Regards,
Randolf
Oracle related stuff:
http://oracle-randolf.blogspot.com/
SQLTools++ for Oracle:
http://www.sqltools-plusplus.org:7676/
http://sourceforge.net/projects/sqlt-pp/

Why my query not using any index but doing a FULL TABLE SCAN

Hi,
My EXPLAIN PLAN output is
Plan hash value: 1163866984
| Id | Operation               | Name              | Rows | Bytes |TempSpc| Cost (%CPU)| Time     |
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT        |                   |   774 |   159K|       | 40847   (2)| 00:08:11 |
|* 1 | FILTER                 |                   |       |       |       |            |          |
|   2 |   SORT GROUP BY         |                   |   774 |   159K|       | 40847   (2)| 00:08:11 |
|* 3 |    HASH JOIN            |                   | 77337 |    15M| 9744K| 40843   (2)| 00:08:11 |
|* 4 |     HASH JOIN           |                   | 77337 | 8836K| 5896K| 20987   (2)| 00:04:12 |
|* 5 |      HASH JOIN          |                   | 77337 | 4984K|       | 9292   (3)| 00:01:52 |
|* 6 |       HASH JOIN         |                   | 24991 |   951K|       | 3349   (3)| 00:00:41 |
|* 7 |        TABLE ACCESS FULL| IDS_TXNIDNUMBERS | 24991 |   683K|       | 2328   (3)| 00:00:28 |
|   8 |        TABLE ACCESS FULL| IDS_TXNDEMDATAMAP | 2419K|    25M|       | 1006   (3)| 00:00:13 |
|   9 |       TABLE ACCESS FULL | IDS_IDNUMBERS     | 7435K|   191M|       | 5903   (2)| 00:01:11 |
| 10 |      TABLE ACCESS FULL | IDS_DEMDATA       | 2583K|   125M|       | 3683   (5)| 00:00:45 |
| 11 |     TABLE ACCESS FULL   | IDS_TXN           | 2583K|   231M|       | 6403   (1)| 00:01:17 |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- All my 5 tables IDS_TXNIDNUMBERS, IDS_TXNDEMDATAMAP, IDS_IDNUMBERS,IDS_DEMDATA, IDS_TXN has indexes in relevant columns. Is it cause less time so CBO is not using the indexes.
Thanks
Amitava.

amitavachatterjee1975 wrote:
Please be polite when responding to my queries. If you find these questions not to your standard, stay away from them. This is an open forum and I have got my full rights to ask questions.Unsure, what wrong did you find in SB's reply. I find those links perfectly knowledgeable. The question of having so many unanswered questions probably pricked you a little too much. But that, IMO, is a legitimate question, to be asked to a User who even after being associated with OTN for over an year has 100% record of not getting an answer.
For your original question, you will have to provide more details to allow people to answer you.
You must read {message:id=3292438} and post the mentioned details. People do not carry a Crystal Ball to identify the problem merely by reading few lines of Problem description and Explain plans. Do not make people guess, provide appropriate details, to help them Help "You".

10.2.0.3 does not use a index

Hi
I have a simple query which in 9i uses a index but after upgrading to 10.2.0.3 has stopped useing the index and instead prefers a hash join and a full table scan.
Any idea if this is a bug in 10.2.0.3 or how do i go about doing this investigation
SELECT sum((col1)/(col2+col1))*col1*100/(col3)
    FROM tab1a, tab2 b
    WHERE     a.tab2_id = b.id
          AND a.col2 = 26538
          AND b.col3    > 0
| Id | Operation                     | Name                     | Starts | E-Rows | A-Rows |   A-Time   | Buffers | Reads |
|   1 | SORT AGGREGATE               |                          |      1 |      1 |      1 |00:00:00.30 |   64362 |      2 |
|   2 |   NESTED LOOPS                |                          |      1 | 23662 | 21348 |00:00:00.27 |   64362 |      2 |
|   3 |    TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID| tab1                 |      1 | 23662 | 21348 |00:00:00.03 |     316 |      1 |
|* 4 |     INDEX RANGE SCAN          | col2_idx    |      1 | 23662 | 21348 |00:00:00.01 |      51 |      0 |
|* 5 |    TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID| tab2                | 21348 |      1 | 21348 |00:00:00.21 |   64046 |      1 |
|* 6 |     INDEX UNIQUE SCAN         | tab2_PK             | 21348 |      1 | 21348 |00:00:00.12 |   42698 |      0 |
Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
   4 - access("A"."col2"=26538)
   5 - filter("B"."col3">0)
   6 - access("A"."tab2_ID"="B"."ID")
Plan in 10g 10.2.0.3
PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
Plan hash value: 2369063540
| Id | Operation                     | Name                     | Starts | E-Rows | A-Rows |   A-Time   | Buffers | Reads | OMem | 1Mem | Used-Mem |
|   1 | SORT AGGREGATE               |                          |      1 |      1 |      1 |00:00:45.80 |     196K|    193K|       |       |          |
|   3 |    TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID| tab1                |      1 | 24189 | 21348 |00:00:00.02 |     318 |      0 |       |       |          |
|* 4 |     INDEX RANGE SCAN          | col2_idx |      1 | 24189 | 21348 |00:00:00.01 |      51 |      0 |       |       |          |
|* 5 |    TABLE ACCESS FULL          | tab2                |      1 |     12M|     12M|00:00:37.20 |     196K|    193K|       |       |          |
Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
   2 - access("A"."tab2_ID"="B"."ID")
   4 - access("A"."col2"=26538)
   5 - filter("B"."col3">0)Any idea how do i find out why the index usage has been stopped

Hi
Here are the plans on the 10gr2 database with and without the hints.
The index plan uses some milliseconds to get the answer whereas the full table acesses gets the result in about 2 minutes which is not acceptable
I am trying to generate the 10053 trace
I am not in favour of fiddling around with the Optimizer parameters as i am not sure what could go wrong with other queries
| Id | Operation                     | Name                     | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT              |                          |     1 |    36 | 8955 (16)| 00:00:43 |
|   1 | SORT AGGREGATE               |                          |     1 |    36 |            |          |
|* 2 |   HASH JOIN                   |                          | 24605 |   865K| 8955 (16)| 00:00:43 |
|   3 |    TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID| tab1                     | 24605 |   360K|   374   (1)| 00:00:02 |
|* 4 |     INDEX RANGE SCAN          | tab1_col2_I              | 24605 |       |    61   (2)| 00:00:01 |
|* 5 |    TABLE ACCESS FULL          | tab2                     |    12M|   248M| 8398 (15)| 00:00:40 |
Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
   2 - access("A"."tab2_ID"="B"."ID")
   4 - access("A"."col2"=31108)
   5 - filter("B"."col3">0)
19 rows selected.
Elapsed: 00:00:00.01
explain plan for
SELECT /*+ INDEX(b tab2_PK) */
     sum((col1)/(col2+col1))*col1*100/(col3)
FROM tab1 a, tab2 b
WHERE     a.tab2_id = b.id
AND a.col2 = 31108
AND b.col3    > 0
PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
Plan hash value: 3651119713
| Id | Operation                     | Name                     | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT              |                          |     1 |    36 | 49644   (1)| 00:03:56 |
|   1 | SORT AGGREGATE               |                          |     1 |    36 |            |          |
|   2 |   NESTED LOOPS                |                          | 24605 |   865K| 49644   (1)| 00:03:56 |
|   3 |    TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID| tab1                       | 24605 |   360K|   374   (1)| 00:00:02 |
|* 4 |     INDEX RANGE SCAN          | tab1_col2_I            | 24605 |       |    61   (2)| 00:00:01 |
|* 5 |    TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID| tab2                     |     1 |    21 |     2   (0)| 00:00:01 |
|* 6 |     INDEX UNIQUE SCAN         | tab2_PK                  |     1 |       |     1   (0)| 00:00:01 |
Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
   4 - access("A"."col2"=31108)
   5 - filter("B"."col3">0)
   6 - access("A"."tab2_ID"="B"."ID")
20 rows selected.
Elapsed: 00:00:00.01
{code}
regards
Hrishy
Edited by: hrishy on Dec 19, 2008 2:10 AM
Edited by: hrishy on Dec 19, 2008 2:15 AM

PL/SQL TABLE declarations must currently use binary_integer indexes

Hi,
I am having procedure written in form6i, this procedure is having pl/sql table datatyep "v_suppmesg orcl.err_message.error_tabtype;" this pl/sql datatype is defined in database and the procedure in database is not having any error in it.
But when i am compling my form its giving me error
PL/SQL TABLE declarations must currently use binary_integer indexes
and error point is *"i_rowindex"* in the sentance given below.
*"SET_GROUP_CHAR_CELL (g_suppress_error_colid, v_rowindex, v_suppmesg(i_rowindex));"*
PROCEDURE PRC_A IS
v_rowindex NUMBER (5,0) := 1;
v_suppmesg orcl.err_message.error_tabtype;
BEGIN
g_suppress_error_rgid := FIND_GROUP (g_suppress_error_rgname);
IF ID_NULL (g_suppress_error_rgid)
THEN
g_suppress_error_rgid := CREATE_GROUP (g_suppress_error_rgname, GLOBAL_SCOPE);
g_suppress_error_colid := ADD_GROUP_COLUMN ( g_suppress_error_rgid
, g_suppress_error_colname
, CHAR_COLUMN
, 15);
orcl.err_message.get_messages (v_suppmesg);
FOR i_rowindex IN 1..v_suppmesg.count
LOOP
ADD_GROUP_ROW (g_suppress_error_rgid, END_OF_GROUP);
SET_GROUP_CHAR_CELL (g_suppress_error_colid, v_rowindex, v_suppmesg(i_rowindex));
v_rowindex := v_rowindex + 1;
END LOOP;
ELSE
g_suppress_error_colid := FIND_COLUMN (g_suppress_error_rgname||'.'||g_suppress_error_colname);
END IF;
END Init_Suppress_Message;
can anyone tell me what's wrong in this.

I have the folowing compiling and executing fine (Forms 10.1.2):
DECLARE
type t1 is table of VARCHAR2(100) index by BINARY_INTEGER ;
tab t1;
rg_id RecordGroup;
gc_id GroupColumn;
BEGIN
     tab(1) := 'One' ;
     tab(2) := 'Two' ;
     tab(3) := 'Three' ;
     rg_id := FIND_GROUP ('RG10');
     IF ID_NULL (rg_id)
     THEN
          rg_id := CREATE_GROUP ('RG10', GLOBAL_SCOPE);
          gc_id := ADD_GROUP_COLUMN ( 'RG10'
          , 'COL1'
          , CHAR_COLUMN
          , 15);
          --orcl.err_message.get_messages (v_suppmesg);
          FOR i IN 1..tab.count
          LOOP
          ADD_GROUP_ROW ('RG10', END_OF_GROUP);
          SET_GROUP_CHAR_CELL ('RG10.COL1', i, tab(i));
          END LOOP;
     END IF;
END;Francois

What is use of index by binaary_integer

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for