Why is my SQL not using an index?

I have a small SQL query (10g) where I join to basic table together on a customer_id column.
select *
from customer c
inner join work_item sp1 ON sp1.customer_id = c.customer_id
and I am using TOAD, which tells me (in the Explain Plan area), that I'm doing a "TABLE ACCESS FULL" scan on the customer table.
But when I look at the details of BOTH tables, I can clearly see that they both have an index on the customer field, and they are both the same data types...
The interesting thing, is that if I change the query to only select data from the work_item table,
select sp1.*
from customer c
inner join work_item sp1 ON sp1.customer_id = c.customer_id
I can see that the indexes are being used...
Why is this? I must be able to select certain columns from the customer table, but why would it not use an index when I do?
Thanks!

If I understand correctly, below is a simple test case.
I created a small table and indexed "object_id" column.
When I issue "Select * from t" optimizer goes with FULL TABLE SCAN, whereas wehn "select OBJECT_ID from t" is issued, optimizer chooses to read from the index instead of accessing the table. This is because FAST FULL SCAN is far cheaper than a FTS in this case.
SQL> create table t as select object_id, object_name from all_objects;
Table created.
SQL> exec dbms_stats.gather_table_stats(user, 't');
PL/SQL procedure successfully completed.
SQL> create index t_idx1 on t(object_id);
Index created.
SQL> set autotrace traceonly exp
SQL> select * from t;
Execution Plan
Plan hash value: 1601196873
| Id  | Operation         | Name | Rows  | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT  |      | 37932 |  1074K|    55   (2)| 00:00:01 |
| 1 | TABLE ACCESS FULL| T | 37932 | 1074K| 55 (2)| 00:00:01 |
SQL> select object_id from t;
Execution Plan
Plan hash value: 3958994525
| Id  | Operation            | Name   | Rows  | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT     |        | 37932 |   185K|    25   (0)| 00:00:01 |
| 1 | INDEX FAST FULL SCAN| T_IDX1 | 37932 | 185K| 25 (0)| 00:00:01 |
SQL>

Similar Messages

  • Why is this query not using the index?

    check out this query:-
    SELECT CUST_PO_NUMBER, HEADER_ID, ORDER_TYPE, PO_DATE
    FROM TABLE1
    WHERE STATUS = 'N'
    and here's the explain plan:-
    1     
    2     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    3     | Id | Operation | Name | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)|
    4     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    5     | 0 | SELECT STATEMENT | | 2735K| 140M| 81036 (2)|
    6     |* 1 | TABLE ACCESS FULL| TABLE1 | 2735K| 140M| 81036 (2)|
    7     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    8     
    9     Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
    10     ---------------------------------------------------
    11     
    12     1 - filter("STATUS"='N')
    There is already an index on this column, as is shown below:-
         INDEX_NAME INDEX_TYPE     UNIQUENESS     TABLE_NAME     COLUMN_NAME     COLUMN_POSITION
    1     TABLE1_IDX2 NORMAL     NONUNIQUE     TABLE1      STATUS     1
    2     TABLE1_IDX NORMAL     NONUNIQUE     TABLE1     HEADER_ID     1
    So why is this query not using the index on the 'STATUS' Column?
    I've already tried using optimizer hints and regathering the stats on the table, but the execution plan still remains the same, i.e. it still uses a FTS.
    I have tried this command also:-
    exec dbms_stats.gather_table_stats('GECS','GEPS_CS_SALES_ORDER_HEADER',method_opt=>'for all indexed columns size auto',cascade=>true,degree=>4);
    inspite of this, the query is still using a full table scan.
    The table has around 55 Lakh records, across 60 columns. And because of the FTS, the query is taking a long time to execute. How do i make it use the index?
    Please help.
    Edited by: user10047779 on Mar 16, 2010 6:55 AM

    If the cardinality is really as skewed as that, you may want to look at putting a histogram on the column (sounds like it would be in order, and that you don't have one).
    create table skewed_a_lot
    as
       select
          case when mod(level, 1000) = 0 then 'N' else 'Y' end as Flag,
          level as col1
       from dual connect by level <= 1000000;
    create index skewed_a_lot_i01 on skewed_a_lot (flag);
    exec dbms_stats.gather_table_stats(user, 'SKEWED_A_LOT', cascade => true, method_opt => 'for all indexed columns size auto');Is an example.

  • Why my select is not using the index

    This is my index
    CREATE INDEX CONFIG_STATE_IDX ON IDENTIFIER
    (CONFIGURATION_ID, STATE)
    LOGGING
    TABLESPACE NII_INDEX
    PCTFREE 10
    INITRANS 2
    MAXTRANS 255
    STORAGE (
    INITIAL 64K
    MINEXTENTS 1
    MAXEXTENTS 2147483645
    PCTINCREASE 0
    FREELISTS 1
    FREELIST GROUPS 1
    BUFFER_POOL DEFAULT
    NOPARALLEL;
    This is my select statement:
    SELECT *
    FROM identifier i
    WHERE
         i.configuration_id = '89afead40a0c0b8d00628c59aa405ea4'
         AND i.state = 'QT'
    AND ROWNUM <6
    This is my exmplain plan result
    Operation     Object Name     Rows     Bytes     Cost     Object Node     In/Out     PStart     PStop
    SELECT STATEMENT Hint=CHOOSE          5           2128                     
    COUNT STOPKEY                                        
    TABLE ACCESS FULL     IDENTIFIER     133 K     19 M     2128                     
    Why it is not using the index on configuration_id and state.

    Possibility one: you didn't do an analyze statistics on the table and/or the index after index creation.
    Possibility two: The optimizer has determined that it can return the query result set with fewer I/Os if it does a FTS vs using the index (the optimizer is very keen on I/Os).

  • Why is this query not using my index ?

    hey
    i have the following situation
    (i'm sorry but i can't add the acctual script or output)
    create table x as
    select      level high_card ,
         mod(level,1000) medium_card ,
         mod(level,10) low_card ,
         '***' padding
    from     dual
    connect by level < 100001;
    create index x_med_low_ix on x(low_card,medium_card);
    create index x_high_ix on x(high_card);
    exec dbms_stats.gather_table_stats(user,'x',cascade=>true,method_opt=>'for all indexed columns size auto');
    i'm running the following query
    select      *
    from      x
    where      low_card = 70
    and     medium_card = 70
    and     high_card = 70;
    i'm expecting a range scan on the x_high_ix index. the optimizer expects only one row. the stats on the high_card columns shows that (num_rows * density = 1).
    when i run the query the optimizer uses the x_med_low_ix and does 14 cr.
    when i force the use of x_high_ix the cr goes down to 4.
    i don't want to declare x_high_ix as unique.
    so, why isn't he using my index ?

    It's using that index for me:
    SQL> create table x as
      2  select level high_card ,
      3  mod(level,1000) medium_card ,
      4  mod(level,10) low_card ,
      5  '***' padding
      6  from dual
      7  connect by level < 100001;
    Table created.
    SQL>
    SQL> create index x_med_low_ix on x(low_card,medium_card);
    Index created.
    SQL>
    SQL> create index x_high_ix on x(high_card);
    Index created.
    SQL>
    SQL> exec dbms_stats.gather_table_stats(user,'x',cascade=>true,method_opt=>'for all indexed columns
    size auto');
    PL/SQL procedure successfully completed.
    SQL> ed
    Wrote file afiedt.buf
      1   select *
      2   from x
      3   where low_card = 70
      4   and medium_card = 70
      5*  and high_card = 70
    SQL>
    SQL> /
    no rows selected
    Execution Plan
    Plan hash value: 775193209
    | Id  | Operation                   | Name      | Rows  | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |
    |   0 | SELECT STATEMENT            |           |     1 |    15 |     2   (0)| 00:00:01 |
    |*  1 |  TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID| X         |     1 |    15 |     2   (0)| 00:00:01 |
    |*  2 |   INDEX RANGE SCAN          | X_HIGH_IX |     1 |       |     1   (0)| 00:00:01 |
    Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
       1 - filter("LOW_CARD"=70 AND "MEDIUM_CARD"=70)
       2 - access("HIGH_CARD"=70)
    Statistics
              0  recursive calls
              0  db block gets
              3  consistent gets
              0  physical reads
              0  redo size
            454  bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
            370  bytes received via SQL*Net from client
              1  SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
              0  sorts (memory)
              0  sorts (disk)
              0  rows processed
    SQL> set autot off
    SQL> select * from v$version;
    Oracle Database 10g Enterprise Edition Release 10.2.0.1.0 - Prod
    PL/SQL Release 10.2.0.1.0 - Production
    CORE    10.2.0.1.0      Production
    TNS for 32-bit Windows: Version 10.2.0.1.0 - Production
    NLSRTL Version 10.2.0.1.0 - Productionwhat is your version?
    By the way, when i force optimizer to use index X_MED_LOW_IX, it does 2 CR for me.

  • SQL Query not using Composite Index

    Hi,
    Please look at the below query:
    SELECT pde.participant_uid
    ,pde.award_code
    ,pde.award_type
    ,SUM(decode(pde.distribution_type
    ,'FORFEITURE'
    ,pde.forfeited_quantity *
    pde.sold_price * cc.rate
    ,pde.distributed_quantity *
    pde.sold_price * cc.rate)) AS gross_Amt_pref_Curr
    FROM part_distribution_exec pde
    ,currency_conversion cc
    ,currency off_curr
    WHERE pde.participant_uid = 4105
    AND off_curr.currency_iso_code =
    pde.offering_currency_iso_code
    AND cc.from_currency_uid = off_curr.currency_uid
    AND cc.to_currency_uid = 1
    AND cc.latest_flag = 'Y'
    GROUP BY pde.participant_uid
    ,pde.award_code
    ,pde.award_type
    In oracle 9i, i"ve executed this above query, it takes 6 seconds and the cost is 616, this is due to non usage of the composite index, Currency_conversion_idx(From_currency_uid, To_currency_uid, Latest_flag). I wonder why this index is not used while executing the above query. So, I've dropped the index and recreated it. Now, the query is using this index. After inserting many rows or say in 1 days time, if the same query is executed, again the query is not using the index. So everyday, the index should be dropped and recreated.
    I don't want this drop and recreation of index daily, I need a permanent solution for this.
    Can anyone tell me, Why this index goes stale after a period of time???? Please take some time and Solve this issue.
    -Sankar

    Hi David,
    This is Sankar here. Thankyou for your reply.
    I've got the plan table output for this problematic query, please go thro' it and help me out why the index CURRENCY_CONVERSION_IDX is used now and why it's not using while executing the query after a day or inserting some records...
    PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
    | Id | Operation | Name | Rows | Bytes | Cost |
    | 0 | SELECT STATEMENT | | 26 | 15678 | 147 |
    | 1 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID | PART_AWARD_PAYOUT_SCHEDULE | 1 | 89 | 2 |
    |* 2 | INDEX UNIQUE SCAN | PART_AWARD_PAYOUT_SCHEDULE_PK1 | 61097 | | 1 |
    | 3 | SORT AGGREGATE | | 1 | 67 | |
    |* 4 | FILTER | | | | |
    |* 5 | INDEX RANGE SCAN | PART_AWARD_PAYOUT_SCHEDULE_PK1 | 1 | 67 | 2 |
    | 6 | SORT AGGREGATE | | 1 | 94 | |
    |* 7 | FILTER | | | | |
    |* 8 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID | PART_AWARD_PAYOUT_SCHEDULE | 1 | 94 | 3 |
    |* 9 | INDEX RANGE SCAN | PART_AWARD_PAYOUT_SCHEDULE_PK1 | 1 | | 2 |
    |* 10 | FILTER | | | | |
    |* 11 | HASH JOIN | | 26 | 15678 | 95 |
    |* 12 | HASH JOIN OUTER | | 26 | 11596 | 91 |
    |* 13 | HASH JOIN | | 26 | 10218 | 86 |
    | 14 | VIEW | | 1 | 82 | 4 |
    | 15 | SORT GROUP BY | | 1 | 116 | 4 |
    |* 16 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID | PART_AWARD_LEDGER | 1 | 116 | 2 |
    |* 17 | INDEX RANGE SCAN | PARTICIPANT_UID_IDX | 1 | | 1 |
    |* 18 | HASH JOIN OUTER | | 26 | 8086 | 82 |
    |* 19 | HASH JOIN | | 26 | 6006 | 71 |
    | 20 | NESTED LOOPS | | 36 | 5904 | 66 |
    | 21 | NESTED LOOPS | | 1 | 115 | 65 |
    | 22 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID | CURRENCY_CONVERSION | 18 | 756 | 2 |
    |* 23 | INDEX RANGE SCAN | KLS_IDX_CURRENCY_CONV | 3 | | 1 |
    | 24 | VIEW | | 1 | 73 | 4 |
    | 25 | SORT GROUP BY | | 1 | 71 | 4 |
    | 26 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID| PART_AWARD_VALUE | 1 | 71 | 2 |
    |* 27 | INDEX RANGE SCAN | PAV_PARTICIPANT_UID_IDX | 1 | | 1 |
    | 28 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID | PARTICIPANT_AWARD | 199 | 9751 | 1 |
    |* 29 | INDEX UNIQUE SCAN | PARTICIPANT_AWARD_PK1 | 100 | | |
    |* 30 | INDEX FAST FULL SCAN | PARTICIPANT_AWARD_TYPE_PK1 | 147 | 9849 | 4 |
    | 31 | VIEW | | 1 | 80 | 10 |
    | 32 | SORT GROUP BY | | 1 | 198 | 10 |
    |* 33 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID | CURRENCY_CONVERSION | 1 | 42 | 2 |
    | 34 | NESTED LOOPS | | 1 | 198 | 8 |
    | 35 | NESTED LOOPS | | 2 | 312 | 4 |
    | 36 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID| PART_DISTRIBUTION_EXEC | 2 | 276 | 2 |
    |* 37 | INDEX RANGE SCAN | IND_PARTICIPANT_UID | 1 | | 1 |
    | 38 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID| CURRENCY | 1 | 18 | 1 |
    |* 39 | INDEX UNIQUE SCAN | CURRENCY_AK | 1 | | |
    |* 40 | INDEX RANGE SCAN | CURRENCY_CONVERSION_AK | 2 | | 1 |
    | 41 | VIEW | | 1 | 53 | 4 |
    | 42 | SORT GROUP BY | | 1 | 62 | 4 |
    |* 43 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID | PART_AWARD_VESTING | 1 | 62 | 2 |
    |* 44 | INDEX RANGE SCAN | PAVES_PARTICIPANT_UID_IDX | 1 | | 1 |
    | 45 | TABLE ACCESS FULL | AWARD | 1062 | 162K| 3 |
    | 46 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID | CURRENCY | 1 | 18 | 2 |
    |* 47 | INDEX UNIQUE SCAN | CURRENCY_AK | 102 | | 1 |
    Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
    2 - access("PAPS"."AWARD_CODE"=:B1 AND "PAPS"."PARTICIPANT_UID"=4105 AND "PAPS"."AWARD_TYPE"=:B2
    "PAPS"."INSTALLMENT_NUM"=1)
    4 - filter(4105=:B1)
    5 - access("PAPS"."AWARD_CODE"=:B1 AND "PAPS"."PARTICIPANT_UID"=4105 AND "PAPS"."AWARD_TYPE"=:B2)
    7 - filter(4105=:B1)
    8 - filter("PAPS"."STATUS"='OPEN')
    9 - access("PAPS"."AWARD_CODE"=:B1 AND "PAPS"."PARTICIPANT_UID"=4105 AND "PAPS"."AWARD_TYPE"=:B2)
    10 - filter("CC_A_P_CURR"."FROM_CURRENCY_UID"= (SELECT /*+ */ "CURRENCY"."CURRENCY_UID" FROM
    "EWAPDBO"."CURRENCY" "CURRENCY" WHERE "CURRENCY"."CURRENCY_ISO_CODE"=:B1))
    11 - access("SYS_ALIAS_7"."AWARD_CODE"="A"."AWARD_CODE")
    12 - access("SYS_ALIAS_7"."AWARD_CODE"="PVS"."AWARD_CODE"(+))
    13 - access("SYS_ALIAS_8"."AWARD_CODE"="PALS"."AWARD_CODE" AND
    "SYS_ALIAS_8"."AWARD_TYPE"="PALS"."AWARD_TYPE")
    16 - filter(TRUNC("PAL1"."LEDGER_ENTRY_DATE")<=TRUNC(SYSDATE@!) AND "PAL1"."ALLOC_TYPE"='IPU')
    17 - access("PAL1"."PARTICIPANT_UID"=4105)
    filter("PAL1"."PARTICIPANT_UID"=4105)
    18 - access("SYS_ALIAS_8"."AWARD_CODE"="PDES"."AWARD_CODE"(+) AND
    "SYS_ALIAS_8"."AWARD_TYPE"="PDES"."AWARD_TYPE"(+))
    19 - access("SYS_ALIAS_7"."AWARD_CODE"="SYS_ALIAS_8"."AWARD_CODE")
    23 - access("CC_A_P_CURR"."TO_CURRENCY_UID"=1 AND "CC_A_P_CURR"."LATEST_FLAG"='Y')
    27 - access("PAV"."PARTICIPANT_UID"=4105)
    filter("PAV"."PARTICIPANT_UID"=4105)
    29 - access("SYS_ALIAS_7"."AWARD_CODE"="SYS_ALIAS_9"."AWARD_CODE" AND
    "SYS_ALIAS_7"."PARTICIPANT_UID"=4105)
    30 - filter("SYS_ALIAS_8"."PARTICIPANT_UID"=4105)
    33 - filter("CC"."LATEST_FLAG"='Y')
    37 - access("PDE"."PARTICIPANT_UID"=4105)
    filter("PDE"."PARTICIPANT_UID"=4105)
    39 - access("OFF_CURR"."CURRENCY_ISO_CODE"="PDE"."OFFERING_CURRENCY_ISO_CODE")
    40 - access("CC"."FROM_CURRENCY_UID"="OFF_CURR"."CURRENCY_UID" AND "CC"."TO_CURRENCY_UID"=1)
    43 - filter("PV"."VESTING_DATE"<=SYSDATE@!)
    44 - access("PV"."PARTICIPANT_UID"=4105)
    filter("PV"."PARTICIPANT_UID"=4105)
    47 - access("CURRENCY"."CURRENCY_ISO_CODE"=:B1)
    Note: cpu costing is off
    93 rows selected.
    Please help me out...
    -Sankar

  • 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.

  • Why does it not use the index?

    L.S.,
    We are using a table called IT_RFC_REGISTRATION. It is a relatively big table for our application.
    Its primary key is RFCNR, each new RFCNR getting the next value.
    Now for my intranet report I am interested in the last 40 records. But when I execute:
    SELECT *
    FROM IT_RFC_REGISTRATION
    ORDER BY RFCNR DESC
    the query takes ages to execute.
    When I do this:
    SELECT RFCNR
    FROM IT_RFC_REGISTRATION
    ORDER BY RFCNR DESC
    the result comes instantaneous because this query uses the index on RFCNR.
    Why does the former query not use the index to execute? It should be much faster to fetch ROWIDs from the index end to start and use those to get the records, than to load all the records and then sort them.
    Is there a trick with which I can use a join of the latter query and the former query to speed up the result?
    Greetings,
    Philbert de Zwart,
    Utrecht, The Netherlands.

    The difference you see in query run time is based on the amount data being sorted, then returned. In the first query, a full table scan is faster since if the index was used, Oracle would have to do a lookup in the index, get the rowid's and go look up the data in the table (TWO disk i/o's). It's faster to just scan the entire table.
    Indexes will generally not be used unless you have a where clause. If you only need a few fields from the table, you could include them all in an index. For instance, if you only need RFCNR & DESC create a concatenated index on those two columns and then only a scan of the index is required (very fast).

  • 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".

  • Query not using the index

    Query
    SELECT case.case_objid FROM [email protected] case, table_x_cwp_tickect_details_vw t WHERE CASE.case_condition_cd IN ('OPEN', 'OPEN-DISPATCH', 'OPEN-REJECT', 'OPEN-RETURNED') AND case.case_type_cd in ('CUSTOMER FAULT', 'CHRONIC','SCHEDULED ACTIVITY','PROBLEM') AND ROWNUM <= 500 AND case.case_objid = t.ticket_objid AND ( ( case.account_id = '672286' ) ) ORDER BY case.case_id DESC
    From PROD
    Plan
    SELECT STATEMENT HINT: FIRST_ROWS Cost: 2,629 Bytes: 221,500 Cardinality: 500
         37 SORT ORDER BY Cost: 2,629 Bytes: 221,500 Cardinality: 500
              36 COUNT STOPKEY
                   35 NESTED LOOPS OUTER Cost: 2,628 Bytes: 279,533 Cardinality: 631
                        33 HASH JOIN OUTER Cost: 2,627 Bytes: 275,116 Cardinality: 631
                             31 NESTED LOOPS OUTER Cost: 2,249 Bytes: 266,282 Cardinality: 631
                                  28 NESTED LOOPS Cost: 1,766 Bytes: 257,448 Cardinality: 631
                                       26 NESTED LOOPS Cost: 1,765 Bytes: 253,031 Cardinality: 631
                                            24 NESTED LOOPS Cost: 1,764 Bytes: 248,614 Cardinality: 631
                                                 22 NESTED LOOPS Cost: 1,763 Bytes: 244,197 Cardinality: 631
                                                      19 NESTED LOOPS Cost: 1,258 Bytes: 235,363 Cardinality: 631
                                                           17 NESTED LOOPS Cost: 1,257 Bytes: 230,946 Cardinality: 631
                                                                14 NESTED LOOPS OUTER Cost: 752 Bytes: 217,695 Cardinality: 631
                                                                     12 HASH JOIN Cost: 751 Bytes: 213,278 Cardinality: 631
                                                                          1 INDEX FAST FULL SCAN INDEX (UNIQUE) SA.GBST_ELM_OBJINDEX Cost: 2 Bytes: 10,052 Cardinality: 1,436
                                                                          11 HASH JOIN Cost: 748 Bytes: 208,861 Cardinality: 631
                                                                               2 INDEX FAST FULL SCAN INDEX (UNIQUE) SA.GBST_ELM_OBJINDEX Cost: 2 Bytes: 10,052 Cardinality: 1,436
                                                                               10 HASH JOIN Cost: 746 Bytes: 204,444 Cardinality: 631
                                                                                    3 INDEX FAST FULL SCAN INDEX (UNIQUE) SA.GBST_ELM_OBJINDEX Cost: 2 Bytes: 10,052 Cardinality: 1,436
                                                                                    9 HASH JOIN Cost: 743 Bytes: 200,027 Cardinality: 631
                                                                                         4 INDEX FAST FULL SCAN INDEX (UNIQUE) SA.GBST_ELM_OBJINDEX Cost: 2 Bytes: 10,052 Cardinality: 1,436
                                                                                         8 NESTED LOOPS Cost: 741 Bytes: 195,610 Cardinality: 631
                                                                                              5 REMOTE REMOTE CASE Cost: 235 Bytes: 156,488 Cardinality: 631
                                                                                              7 TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID TABLE SA.TABLE_CASE Cost: 1 Bytes: 62 Cardinality: 1
                                                                                                   6 INDEX UNIQUE SCAN INDEX (UNIQUE) SA.TC_C_CASE_OBJINDEX Cost: 1 Cardinality: 1
                                                                     13 INDEX UNIQUE SCAN INDEX (UNIQUE) SA.UN_PTT2CASE Cost: 1 Bytes: 7 Cardinality: 1
                                                                16 TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID TABLE SA.TABLE_SITE Cost: 1 Bytes: 21 Cardinality: 1
                                                                     15 INDEX UNIQUE SCAN INDEX (UNIQUE) SA.SITE_OBJINDEX Cost: 1 Cardinality: 1
                                                           18 INDEX UNIQUE SCAN INDEX (UNIQUE) SA.BUS_ORG_OBJINDEX Cost: 1 Bytes: 7 Cardinality: 1
                                                      21 TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID TABLE SA.TABLE_ADDRESS Cost: 1 Bytes: 14 Cardinality: 1
                                                           20 INDEX UNIQUE SCAN INDEX (UNIQUE) SA.ADDRESS_OBJINDEX Cost: 1 Cardinality: 1
                                                 23 INDEX UNIQUE SCAN INDEX (UNIQUE) SA.COUNTRY_OBJINDEX Cost: 1 Bytes: 7 Cardinality: 1
                                            25 INDEX UNIQUE SCAN INDEX (UNIQUE) SA.CONTACT_OBJINDEX Cost: 1 Bytes: 7 Cardinality: 1
                                       27 INDEX UNIQUE SCAN INDEX (UNIQUE) SA.CONDITION_OBJINDEX Cost: 1 Bytes: 7 Cardinality: 1
                                  30 TABLE ACCESS BY GLOBAL INDEX ROWID TABLE SA.TABLE_SITE_PART Cost: 1 Bytes: 14 Cardinality: 1 Partition #: 34
                                       29 INDEX UNIQUE SCAN INDEX (UNIQUE) SA.SITE_PART_OBJINDEX Cost: 1 Cardinality: 1
                             bold 32 TABLE ACCESS FULL TABLE SA.TABLE_MOD_LEVEL Cost: 376 Bytes: 1,442,084 Cardinality: 103,006 bold
                        34 INDEX UNIQUE SCAN INDEX (UNIQUE) SA.PART_NUM_OBJINDEX Cost: 1 Bytes: 7 Cardinality: 1
    From DEV platform
    Plan
    SELECT STATEMENT HINT: FIRST_ROWS Cost: 591 Bytes: 61,134 Cardinality: 138
         37 SORT ORDER BY Cost: 591 Bytes: 61,134 Cardinality: 138
              36 COUNT STOPKEY
                   35 HASH JOIN Cost: 590 Bytes: 61,134 Cardinality: 138
                        1 INDEX FAST FULL SCAN INDEX (UNIQUE) SA.GBST_ELM_OBJINDEX Cost: 2 Bytes: 10,045 Cardinality: 1,435
                        34 HASH JOIN Cost: 588 Bytes: 60,168 Cardinality: 138
                             2 INDEX FAST FULL SCAN INDEX (UNIQUE) SA.GBST_ELM_OBJINDEX Cost: 2 Bytes: 10,045 Cardinality: 1,435
                             33 HASH JOIN Cost: 585 Bytes: 59,202 Cardinality: 138
                                  3 INDEX FAST FULL SCAN INDEX (UNIQUE) SA.GBST_ELM_OBJINDEX Cost: 2 Bytes: 10,045 Cardinality: 1,435
                                  32 HASH JOIN Cost: 583 Bytes: 58,236 Cardinality: 138
                                       4 INDEX FAST FULL SCAN INDEX (UNIQUE) SA.GBST_ELM_OBJINDEX Cost: 2 Bytes: 10,045 Cardinality: 1,435
                                       31 NESTED LOOPS OUTER Cost: 580 Bytes: 57,270 Cardinality: 138
                                            29 NESTED LOOPS OUTER Cost: 579 Bytes: 56,304 Cardinality: 138
                                                 27 NESTED LOOPS OUTER Cost: 469 Bytes: 54,372 Cardinality: 138
                                                      24 NESTED LOOPS Cost: 363 Bytes: 52,440 Cardinality: 138
                                                           22 NESTED LOOPS Cost: 362 Bytes: 51,474 Cardinality: 138
                                                                20 NESTED LOOPS Cost: 361 Bytes: 50,508 Cardinality: 138
                                                                     18 NESTED LOOPS Cost: 360 Bytes: 49,542 Cardinality: 138
                                                                          15 NESTED LOOPS Cost: 249 Bytes: 47,610 Cardinality: 138
                                                                               13 NESTED LOOPS Cost: 248 Bytes: 46,644 Cardinality: 138
                                                                                    10 NESTED LOOPS OUTER Cost: 138 Bytes: 43,746 Cardinality: 138
                                                                                         8 NESTED LOOPS Cost: 137 Bytes: 42,780 Cardinality: 138
                                                                                              5 REMOTE REMOTE CASE Cost: 26 Bytes: 34,224 Cardinality: 138
                                                                                              7 TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID TABLE SA.TABLE_CASE Cost: 1 Bytes: 62 Cardinality: 1
                                                                                                   6 INDEX UNIQUE SCAN INDEX (UNIQUE) SA.TC_C_CASE_OBJINDEX Cost: 1 Cardinality: 1
                                                                                         9 INDEX UNIQUE SCAN INDEX (UNIQUE) SA.UN_PTT2CASE Cost: 1 Bytes: 7 Cardinality: 1
                                                                                    12 TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID TABLE SA.TABLE_SITE Cost: 1 Bytes: 21 Cardinality: 1
                                                                                         11 INDEX UNIQUE SCAN INDEX (UNIQUE) SA.SITE_OBJINDEX Cost: 1 Cardinality: 1
                                                                               14 INDEX UNIQUE SCAN INDEX (UNIQUE) SA.BUS_ORG_OBJINDEX Cost: 1 Bytes: 7 Cardinality: 1
                                                                          17 TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID TABLE SA.TABLE_ADDRESS Cost: 1 Bytes: 14 Cardinality: 1
                                                                               16 INDEX UNIQUE SCAN INDEX (UNIQUE) SA.ADDRESS_OBJINDEX Cost: 1 Cardinality: 1
                                                                     19 INDEX UNIQUE SCAN INDEX (UNIQUE) SA.COUNTRY_OBJINDEX Cost: 1 Bytes: 7 Cardinality: 1
                                                                21 INDEX UNIQUE SCAN INDEX (UNIQUE) SA.CONTACT_OBJINDEX Cost: 1 Bytes: 7 Cardinality: 1
                                                           23 INDEX UNIQUE SCAN INDEX (UNIQUE) SA.CONDITION_OBJINDEX Cost: 1 Bytes: 7 Cardinality: 1
                                                      26 TABLE ACCESS BY GLOBAL INDEX ROWID TABLE SA.TABLE_SITE_PART Cost: 1 Bytes: 14 Cardinality: 1 Partition #: 34
                                                           25 INDEX UNIQUE SCAN INDEX (UNIQUE) SA.SITE_PART_OBJINDEX Cost: 1 Cardinality: 1
                                       bold           28 INDEX RANGE SCAN INDEX SA.IND_PART_INFO2PART_NUM Cost: 1 Bytes: 14 Cardinality: 1 bold
                                            30 INDEX UNIQUE SCAN INDEX (UNIQUE) SA.PART_NUM_OBJINDEX Cost: 1 Bytes: 7 Cardinality: 1
    Conclusion:
    IND_PART_INFO2PART_NUM is not in use in Production environment
    PROD
    1. SQL> select index_name,NUM_ROWS,CLUSTERING_FACTOR from dba_indexes where index_name='IND_PART_INFO2PART_NUM';
    INDEX_NAME NUM_ROWS CLUSTERING_FACTOR
    IND_PART_INFO2PART_NUM 103023 46488
    DEV environment
    SQL> select index_name,NUM_ROWS,CLUSTERING_FACTOR,table_name from dba_indexes where index_name='IND_PART_INFO2PART_NUM';
    INDEX_NAME NUM_ROWS CLUSTERING_FACTOR TABLE_NAME
    IND_PART_INFO2PART_NUM 101982 45722 TABLE_MOD_LEVEL
    1. Index is rebuild
    2. stats are up to date
    3. Redef on table is done.
    Still no change in the plan .

    Osama-mustafa wrote:
    Aman.... wrote:
    Osama-mustafa wrote:
    alter index <index-name> rebuild ;Why?
    Aman....I faced this issue with query and indexes was need rebuildWhat issue Osama-that query wasn't using index and after rebuild it did start using it? Not just that this reply is wrong , this is OP has mentioned that he has done already. Please note that index rebuild is not the answer when the query is not using the index. There can be many reasons behind it. Have a look at Richard Foote's blog where he explains all of this in a very detailed way and in many posts.
    Aman....

  • Why is the Star Transformation using two indexes for the same dimension?

    Hi,
    Recently, I have made an investigation about the Star Transformation feature. I have found a strange test case, which plays an important role in my strategy for our overall DWH architecture. Here it is:
    The Strategy:
    I would like to have the classical Star Transformation approach (single column Bitmap Indexes for each dimension foreign key column in the fact table), together with additional Bitmap Join Indexes for some of the dimension attributes, which would benefit from the materialization of the join (bitmap merge operation will be skipped/optimized).
    The query:
    select dp.brand, ds. region_name, dc.region_name
         , count(*), sum(f.extended_price)
      from fact_line_item  f
         , dim_part       dp
         , dim_supplier   ds
         , dim_customer   dc
    where dp.mfgr        = 10                 -- dimension selectivity = 1/10 --> acttual/fact selectivity = 6/10
       and f.part_dk      = dp.dk
       and ds.region_name = 'REGION #1' -- dimension selectivity = 1/9
       and f.supplier_dk  = ds.dk
       and dc.region_name = 'REGION #1' -- dimension selectivity = 1/11
       and f.customer_dk  = dc.dk
    group by dp.brand, ds. region_name, dc.region_name
    The actual plan:
    | Id  | Operation                              | Name                        | Starts | E-Rows | Cost (%CPU)| A-Rows |   A-Time   | Buffers | Reads  |
    |   0 | SELECT STATEMENT                       |                             |      1 |        |  3247 (100)|      1 |00:01:42.05 |     264K|    220K|
    |   1 |  HASH GROUP BY                         |                             |      1 |      2 |  3247   (1)|      1 |00:01:42.05 |     264K|    220K|
    |*  2 |   HASH JOIN                            |                             |      1 |  33242 |  3037   (1)|    217K|00:01:29.67 |     264K|    220K|
    |*  3 |    TABLE ACCESS FULL                   | DIM_SUPPLIER                |      1 |   1112 |   102   (0)|   1112 |00:00:00.01 |     316 |      4 |
    |*  4 |    HASH JOIN                           |                             |      1 |  33245 |  2934   (1)|    217K|00:01:29.10 |     264K|    220K|
    |*  5 |     TABLE ACCESS FULL                  | DIM_CUSTOMER                |      1 |    910 |   102   (0)|    910 |00:00:00.08 |     316 |      8 |
    |*  6 |     HASH JOIN                          |                             |      1 |  33248 |  2831   (1)|    217K|00:01:28.57 |     264K|    220K|
    |*  7 |      TABLE ACCESS FULL                 | DIM_PART                    |      1 |     10 |     3   (0)|     10 |00:00:00.01 |       6 |      0 |
    |   8 |      PARTITION RANGE ALL               |                             |      1 |  36211 |  2827   (1)|    217K|00:01:28.01 |     264K|    220K|
    |   9 |       TABLE ACCESS BY LOCAL INDEX ROWID| FACT_LINE_ITEM              |      6 |  36211 |  2827   (1)|    217K|00:01:33.85 |     264K|    220K|
    |  10 |        BITMAP CONVERSION TO ROWIDS     |                             |      6 |        |            |    217K|00:00:07.09 |   46980 |   3292 |
    |  11 |         BITMAP AND                     |                             |      6 |        |            |     69 |00:00:08.33 |   46980 |   3292 |
    |  12 |          BITMAP MERGE                  |                             |      6 |        |            |    193 |00:00:02.09 |    2408 |   1795 |
    |  13 |           BITMAP KEY ITERATION         |                             |      6 |        |            |   4330 |00:00:04.66 |    2408 |   1795 |
    |  14 |            BUFFER SORT                 |                             |      6 |        |            |     60 |00:00:00.01 |       6 |      0 |
    |* 15 |             TABLE ACCESS FULL          | DIM_PART                    |      1 |     10 |     3   (0)|     10 |00:00:00.01 |       6 |      0 |
    |* 16 |            BITMAP INDEX RANGE SCAN     | FACT_LI__P_PART_DIM_KEY_BIX |     60 |        |            |   4330 |00:00:02.11 |    2402 |   1795 |
    |* 17 |          BITMAP INDEX SINGLE VALUE     | FACT_LI__P_PART_MFGR_BJX    |      6 |        |            |   1747 |00:00:06.65 |     890 |    888 |
    |  18 |          BITMAP MERGE                  |                             |      6 |        |            |    169 |00:00:02.78 |   16695 |    237 |
    |  19 |           BITMAP KEY ITERATION         |                             |      6 |        |            |   5460 |00:00:01.56 |   16695 |    237 |
    |  20 |            BUFFER SORT                 |                             |      6 |        |            |   5460 |00:00:00.02 |     316 |      0 |
    |* 21 |             TABLE ACCESS FULL          | DIM_CUSTOMER                |      1 |    910 |   102   (0)|    910 |00:00:00.01 |     316 |      0 |
    |* 22 |            BITMAP INDEX RANGE SCAN     | FACT_LI__P_CUST_DIM_KEY_BIX |   5460 |        |            |   5460 |00:00:02.07 |   16379 |    237 |
    |  23 |          BITMAP MERGE                  |                             |      6 |        |            |    170 |00:00:03.65 |   26987 |    372 |
    |  24 |           BITMAP KEY ITERATION         |                             |      6 |        |            |   6672 |00:00:02.23 |   26987 |    372 |
    |  25 |            BUFFER SORT                 |                             |      6 |        |            |   6672 |00:00:00.01 |     316 |      0 |
    |* 26 |             TABLE ACCESS FULL          | DIM_SUPPLIER                |      1 |   1112 |   102   (0)|   1112 |00:00:00.01 |     316 |      0 |
    |* 27 |            BITMAP INDEX RANGE SCAN     | FACT_LI__S_SUPP_DIM_KEY_BIX |   6672 |        |            |   6672 |00:00:02.74 |   26671 |    372 |
    The Question:
    Why is the Star Transformation using both indexes FACT_LI__P_PART_DIM_KEY_BIX and FACT_LI__P_PART_MFGR_BJX for the same dimension criteria (dp.mfgr = 10)?? The introduction of the additional Bitmap Join Index actually make Oracle to do the work twice !!!
    Anybody, any idea ?!?

    Dom, here it is the plan with the predicates:
    | Id  | Operation                              | Name                        | Starts | E-Rows | Cost (%CPU)| A-Rows |   A-Time   | Buffers | Reads  |
    |   0 | SELECT STATEMENT                       |                             |      1 |        |  3638 (100)|      1 |00:06:41.17 |     445K|    236K|
    |   1 |  HASH GROUP BY                         |                             |      1 |      2 |  3638   (1)|      1 |00:06:41.17 |     445K|    236K|
    |*  2 |   HASH JOIN                            |                             |      1 |  33242 |  3429   (1)|    217K|00:08:18.02 |     445K|    236K|
    |*  3 |    TABLE ACCESS FULL                   | DIM_SUPPLIER                |      1 |   1112 |   102   (0)|   1112 |00:00:00.03 |     319 |    313 |
    |*  4 |    HASH JOIN                           |                             |      1 |  33245 |  3326   (1)|    217K|00:08:17.47 |     445K|    236K|
    |*  5 |     TABLE ACCESS FULL                  | DIM_CUSTOMER                |      1 |    910 |   102   (0)|    910 |00:00:00.01 |     319 |    313 |
    |*  6 |     HASH JOIN                          |                             |      1 |  33248 |  3223   (1)|    217K|00:08:16.63 |     445K|    236K|
    |*  7 |      TABLE ACCESS FULL                 | DIM_PART                    |      1 |     10 |     3   (0)|     10 |00:00:00.01 |       6 |      0 |
    |   8 |      PARTITION RANGE ALL               |                             |      1 |  36211 |  3219   (1)|    217K|00:08:16.30 |     445K|    236K|
    |   9 |       TABLE ACCESS BY LOCAL INDEX ROWID| FACT_LINE_ITEM              |      6 |  36211 |  3219   (1)|    217K|00:08:40.89 |     445K|    236K|
    |  10 |        BITMAP CONVERSION TO ROWIDS     |                             |      6 |        |            |    217K|00:00:32.00 |   46919 |  19331 |
    |  11 |         BITMAP AND                     |                             |      6 |        |            |     69 |00:00:34.50 |   46919 |  19331 |
    |  12 |          BITMAP MERGE                  |                             |      6 |        |            |    193 |00:00:00.58 |    2353 |      1 |
    |  13 |           BITMAP KEY ITERATION         |                             |      6 |        |            |   4330 |00:00:00.10 |    2353 |      1 |
    |  14 |            BUFFER SORT                 |                             |      6 |        |            |     60 |00:00:00.01 |       6 |      0 |
    |* 15 |             TABLE ACCESS FULL          | DIM_PART                    |      1 |     10 |     3   (0)|     10 |00:00:00.01 |       6 |      0 |
    |* 16 |            BITMAP INDEX RANGE SCAN     | FACT_LI__P_PART_DIM_KEY_BIX |     60 |        |            |   4330 |00:00:00.07 |    2347 |      1 |
    |* 17 |          BITMAP INDEX SINGLE VALUE     | FACT_LI__P_PART_MFGR_BJX    |      6 |        |            |   1747 |00:01:23.64 |     882 |    565 |
    |  18 |          BITMAP MERGE                  |                             |      6 |        |            |    169 |00:00:09.14 |   16697 |   7628 |
    |  19 |           BITMAP KEY ITERATION         |                             |      6 |        |            |   5460 |00:00:02.19 |   16697 |   7628 |
    |  20 |            BUFFER SORT                 |                             |      6 |        |            |   5460 |00:00:00.01 |     316 |      0 |
    |* 21 |             TABLE ACCESS FULL          | DIM_CUSTOMER                |      1 |    910 |   102   (0)|    910 |00:00:00.01 |     316 |      0 |
    |* 22 |            BITMAP INDEX RANGE SCAN     | FACT_LI__P_CUST_DIM_KEY_BIX |   5460 |        |            |   5460 |00:00:08.78 |   16381 |   7628 |
    |  23 |          BITMAP MERGE                  |                             |      6 |        |            |    170 |00:00:21.46 |   26987 |  11137 |
    |  24 |           BITMAP KEY ITERATION         |                             |      6 |        |            |   6672 |00:00:10.29 |   26987 |  11137 |
    |  25 |            BUFFER SORT                 |                             |      6 |        |            |   6672 |00:00:00.01 |     316 |      0 |
    |* 26 |             TABLE ACCESS FULL          | DIM_SUPPLIER                |      1 |   1112 |   102   (0)|   1112 |00:00:00.01 |     316 |      0 |
    |* 27 |            BITMAP INDEX RANGE SCAN     | FACT_LI__S_SUPP_DIM_KEY_BIX |   6672 |        |            |   6672 |00:00:20.94 |   26671 |  11137 |
    Predicate Information (identified by operation id):                                                                                                  
       2 - access("F"."SUPPLIER_DK"="DS"."DK")                                                                                                           
       3 - filter("DS"."REGION_NAME"='REGION #1')                                                                                                        
       4 - access("F"."CUSTOMER_DK"="DC"."DK")                                                                                                           
       5 - filter("DC"."REGION_NAME"='REGION #1')                                                                                                        
       6 - access("F"."PART_DK"="DP"."DK")                                                                                                               
       7 - filter("DP"."MFGR"=10)                                                                                                                        
      15 - filter("DP"."MFGR"=10)                                                                                                                        
      16 - access("F"."PART_DK"="DP"."DK")                                                                                                               
      17 - access("F"."SYS_NC00017$"=10)                                                                                                                 
      21 - filter("DC"."REGION_NAME"='REGION #1')                                                                                                        
      22 - access("F"."CUSTOMER_DK"="DC"."DK")                                                                                                           
      26 - filter("DS"."REGION_NAME"='REGION #1')                                                                                                        
      27 - access("F"."SUPPLIER_DK"="DS"."DK")                                                                                                           
    Note                                                                                                                                                 
       - star transformation used for this statement                                                                                                     

  • Not using my index !!!

    i have 3 tables:
    customer (has over 120,000 rows)
    business
    workplace
    I'm doing a query which is blowing out (time wise) due to the fact that it's not using the index which i have specified on the customer table. The index which is specified on the customer table has 3 columns in it and in my joins i've used two of them and it's doing a full table scan.
    However, the other two tables are not as big as customer but not very small either and the joins that i've used on them are using the indexes that i've specified and is behaving.

    1.In a query change the order of a table ,keep the tables with less data first
    i.e select a.x,b.y,c.z
    from custormer a,business b,workplace c
    2.As far as u r using 2 columns in the same manner in order which index been created
    it doesn't matter
    check on explain plan and see which of the table been fully scan.
    Jitesh

  • Why isn't my query using the index?

    I have a query that inserts values for engines in a grid; it uses a static date table to determine the day in week, or
    week in year (depending on different standards, the DBA can configure this table to their business's likings). I have
    two indexes on this table:
    create table d_date (
         date_key number(5) not null,
         sql_calendar_date timestamp(3) null,
         year_id number(5) null,
         month_id number(3) null,
         day_id number(3) null,
         year_end_biz_date timestamp(3) null,
         qtr_end_biz_date timestamp(3) null,
         month_end_biz_date timestamp(3) null,
         week_end_biz_date timestamp(3) null,
         quarter_id number(3) null,
         week_id number(3) null,
         day_in_year number(5) null,
         day_in_month number(3) null,
         day_in_week number(3) null,
         month_name char(3) null,
         day_in_week_name char(3) null,
         month_type_code char(1) null,
         week_type_code char(1) null,
         date_type_code char(1) null,
         weekend_flag char(1) null,
         holiday_flag char(1) null,
         from_datetime timestamp(3) null,
         to_datetime timestamp(3) null,
         current_flag char(1) null,
         constraint d_date_pkey primary key (date_key)
         ) tablespace dim;
    create index d_date_dy on d_date(year_id, day_in_year) tablespace_dim_idx;
    create index d_date_ww on d_date(year_id, week_id) tablespace_dim_idx;Now, when I run a query to insert the week id into a table based on two values, the year_key and day_in_year_key,
    it should use the d_date_dy index correct?
    Here is what the query looks like:
    INSERT INTO F_ENGINE (YEAR_KEY,MONTH_KEY,WEEK_IN_YEAR_KEY,DAY_IN_YEAR_KEY,DAY_IN_MONTH_KEY,HOUR_IN_DAY_KEY, Q_HOUR_IN_DAY_KEY,
      GRID_KEY,ENGINE_KEY,TIME_STAMP,ENGINE_CPU_UTIL,ENGINE_CPU_GRID_UTIL,MEMORY_TOTAL_BYTE, MEMORY_FREE_BYTE,DISK_FREE_MEGABYTE,
      PROCESS_COUNT,ENGINE_ID,GRID_ID,GRID_NAME,BATCH_ID,RECORD_VIEWABLE_F)
    SELECT EXTRACT(YEAR FROM START_DATETIME),EXTRACT(MONTH FROM START_DATETIME), DD.WEEK_ID,
      TO_NUMBER(TO_CHAR(START_DATETIME, 'DDD')), EXTRACT(DAY FROM START_DATETIME),EXTRACT(HOUR FROM START_DATETIME),
      FLOOR(EXTRACT(MINUTE FROM START_DATETIME)/15)*15,DG.GRID_KEY,DE.ENGINE_KEY, START_DATETIME,CPU_UTIL,DS_CPU,MEMORY,
      FREE_MEMORY,FREE_DISK,PROCESSES,ID,PE.GRID,DG.GRID_NAME,:B1 ,1
    FROM P_ENGINE PE, D_GRID DG, D_ENGINE DE, D_DATE DD
    WHERE PE.GRID = DG.GRID_ID AND DG.CURRENT_FLAG = 'Y' AND PE.ID = DE.ENGINE_ID AND DE.GRID_KEY = DG.GRID_KEY AND
      DE.CURRENT_FLAG = 'Y' AND PE.BATCH_ID = :B1 AND DD.YEAR_ID = EXTRACT(YEAR FROM START_DATETIME) AND
    DD.DAY_IN_YEAR = TO_NUMBER(TO_CHAR(START_DATETIME,'DDD'))
    ORDER BY EXTRACT(YEAR FROM START_DATETIME),EXTRACT(MONTH FROM START_DATETIME),
      EXTRACT(DAY FROM START_DATETIME),EXTRACT(HOUR FROM START_DATETIME),FLOOR(EXTRACT(MINUTE FROM START_DATETIME)/15)*15,
      DG.GRID_KEY,DE.ENGINE_KEY
    Here is the explain plan:
    Operation Object Object Type Order Rows Size (KB) Cost Time (sec) CPU Cost I/O Cost
    INSERT STATEMENT
    SORT ORDER BY
         HASH JOIN
           HASH JOIN
             HASH JOIN
              TABLE ACCESS FULL D_GRID TABLE 1 2 0.316 3 1 36887 3
              TABLE ACCESS FULL D_ENGINE TABLE 2 10 0.410 3 1 42607 3
             PARTITION LIST SINGLE   5 1434 344.496 9 1 2176890 9
              TABLE ACCESS FULL P_ENGINE TABLE 4 1434 344.496 9 1 2176890 9
                TABLE ACCESS FULL D_DATE TABLE 7 7445 283.550 19 1 3274515 18Now it is obviously not using the index for the d_date table since it is doing a full table access.
    Does this have something to do with the fact that I am using extract(), to_number(), to_char() functions in my WHERE clause that it is not allowing the use of the index?
    Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.
    -Tim

    It's difficult to tell just from this. For one thing, you didn't post your query using the forum format tags, so it's hard to read and you didn't post your Oracle version.
    In the query, you don't always prefix columns with the table alias. That makes it impossible for us (and maintainers of this code) to know at a glance which table a column is in.
    It's possible that performing functions on a column will disable the index. Do your other tables have indexes? Do you have updated statistics on all the tables?
    The main reason the optimizer will not use an index is because it thinks it cheaper not to.

  • 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

  • How to monitor perticuler sql statement using the INDEX or not?

    I am running on a long running quary, and the output is comming very late. So i want to know the sql quary is using the index or not? How to know that?

    If you want to check the real execution plan of a running query without waiting for query completion, you can try following steps that you should adapt to your query and your environment:
    1. start the query
    select
    count(*)
    from all_objects, all_objects;2. Retrieve in another session the SQL_ID and the CHILD_NUMBER of the running query:
    select sql_id, child_number, sql_text
    from v$sql
    where sql_text like '%all_objects%';3. use DBMS_XPLAN.DISPLAY_CURSOR to get the real execution plan from shared pool using SQL_ID and CHILD_NUMBER from step 2:
    select * from table(dbms_xplan.display_cursor(<sql_id>,<child_number>));Actually you don't need to restart the query if it is already running because the hint GATHER_PLAN_STATISTICS is only needed if you want to have current execution statistics.
    Edited by: P. Forstmann on 2 mars 2011 10:23

  • Why isn't the CBO using my indexes?

    Why isn't Oracle using my indexes to join 2 big tables? I ran statistics last night before kicking off this job. I don't want to have to use hints.
    STAGING_TXN_081 has Primary Key on VSYS_STAGE_ROW_ID
    TRANSACTION has an index on STAGING_RECORD_ID
    Record counts are as follows:
    SQL> select count(*) from STAGING_TXN_081;
    COUNT(*)
    613071
    1* select distinct count(staging_record_id) from transaction
    SQL> /
    COUNT(STAGING_RECORD_ID)
    10,662,828
    1* select distinct count(*) from transaction where staging_record_id is null
    SQL> /
    COUNT(*)
    1,150,819
    So 1,150,819 / 10,662,828 = approximately 10.8% of the rows are null.
    This is the Query
    select
        st.*,
        rlog.reject_code as rlogRejectCode
    from       
        STAGING_TXN_081 st
        join transaction t
            on st.VSYS_STAGE_ROW_ID = t.STAGING_RECORD_ID
        left outer join txn_reject_log rlog
            on t.transaction_id = rlog.transaction_id
    where
        not exists
        (select 1
        from
            rl_loyalty_txn_trans rl
            join loyalty_txn lt
                on lt.loyalty_txn_id=rl.loyalty_txn_id
        where
            rl.transaction_id=t.transaction_id)
    order by st.VSYS_STAGE_ROW_ID, rlog.reject_code Here is the execution plan.
    Execution Plan
    Plan hash value: 447420266
    | Id  | Operation                     | Name                    | Rows  | Bytes |TempSpc| Cost (%CPU)| Time     |
    |   0 | SELECT STATEMENT              |                         |     1 |   223 |       |   144K  (6)| 00:29:00 |
    |   1 |  SORT ORDER BY                |                         |     1 |   223 |       |   144K  (6)| 00:29:00 |
    |   2 |   NESTED LOOPS OUTER          |                         |     1 |   223 |       |   144K  (6)| 00:29:00 |
    |*  3 |    HASH JOIN ANTI             |                         |     1 |   203 |   121M|   144K  (6)| 00:29:00 |
    |   4 |     VIEW                      |                         |   613K|   114M|       | 84466   (7)| 00:16:54 |
    |*  5 |      HASH JOIN                |                         |   613K|    71M|    72M| 84466   (7)| 00:16:54 |
    |   6 |       TABLE ACCESS FULL | STAGING_TXN_081         |   613K|    65M|       |  3237   (5)| 00:00:39 |
    |*  7 |       TABLE ACCESS FULL | TRANSACTION             |    10M|   111M|       | 65229   (7)| 00:13:03 |
    |   8 |     VIEW                      | VW_SQ_1                 |    10M|    69M|       | 44389   (6)| 00:08:53 |
    |*  9 |      HASH JOIN                |                         |    10M|   197M|   192M| 44389   (6)| 00:08:53 |
    |  10 |       INDEX FAST FULL SCAN    | PK_LOYALTY_TXN          |    10M|    71M|       |  7314   (7)| 00:01:28 |
    |  11 |       INDEX FAST FULL SCAN    | PK_RL_LOYALTY_TXN_TRANS |    10M|   128M|       | 13947   (4)| 00:
    |  12 |    TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID| TXN_REJECT_LOG          |     1 |    20 |       |     3   (0)| 00:00:01 |
    |* 13 |     INDEX RANGE SCAN          | VIDX_309                |     1 |       |       |     2   (0)| 00:00:01 |
    Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
       3 - access("TRANSACTION_ID"="from$_subquery$_003"."TRANSACTION_ID")
       5 - access("ST"."VSYS_STAGE_ROW_ID"="T"."STAGING_RECORD_ID")
       7 - filter("T"."STAGING_RECORD_ID" IS NOT NULL)
       9 - access("RL"."LOYALTY_TXN_ID"="LT"."LOYALTY_TXN_ID")
      13 - access("T"."TRANSACTION_ID"="RLOG"."TRANSACTION_ID"(+))
    Statistics
            467  recursive calls
              0  db block gets
         324842  consistent gets
         249318  physical reads
              0  redo size
            955  bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
            240  bytes received via SQL*Net from client
              1  SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
              1  sorts (memory)
              0  sorts (disk)
              0  rows processed

    Hi,
    Take these points in consideration
    - STAGING_TXN_081 has to be full table scanned as there is NO filter on that
    - if all the matching 613071 rows from the TRANSACTION table are in different blocks, it might be equivallant to reading full TRANSACTION table (Oracle read blocks not rows)
    - if we are reading all blocks from TRANSACTION table anyway, why waste resources in reading the index blocks
    - How can we tell Oracle that, required TRANSACTION records are not located like 'each row in different block' ??? if that is really the case !!!
    - Your 'not exists' clause, how may records from TRANSACTION table will be filtered out because of that
    - If the 'not exists' will take out huge number of rows, I would suggest creating a in-line view of TRANSACTION table and the 'not exist' logic and then joining that with the STAGING*** table
    - Try to minimise the number of rows taking part in these joins (I know, I am not telling anything new here !!!)
    Cheers

Maybe you are looking for

  • In RG23D  Register is it possible to update general sales

    HI, Experteese, My Client is a Trading Industry  and they will do most of the times imports and becz nature of business he will pass excise benefit to some particular excisable customers, *here is the issue  In SAP we can  make entry of vendor excise

  • Datapump Import remap_Schema does not works

    hi everybody, i've a problem with the import under 10.2.0.3.0 on AIX. I got an dump-file containing a full-databasedump. I just want to import one schema. Under imp i used the fromuser, touser clause. Now i tried it with the following parameters: imp

  • Price in orders not updated by DTW

    Hi experts, I'm trying to update price in order lines with DTW 88.0.11 The DTW returns no error but the price is not updated. During the DTW, I saw in the tab 'Target Data' of the step 5, the row 'price' with the new value. Is there a good reason for

  • Why does the iPad fade out in my protector?

    Why does my iPad fade out in it's protective cover.  I have to remove it from the cover for the fade to disappear and return to normal.

  • FCE crashes during Quicktime Export

    PPC G5 dual 10.4.9 FCE 3.5 QT 7.4.5 FCE consistently crashes when exporting clip as Quicktime Movie. I am new to FCE. When performing this Workflow (below), if I do NOT add the Zoom keyframes the clip exports fine. This is the Workflow that causes th