Re: Sincere Advice on Sql Plan

From: Ganesh Raja <ganesh.raja_at_gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 22:27:10 +0100
Message-ID: <f754edf0410131427764c167c@mail.gmail.com>

The ANSI Query runs for 20 Secs to get 20 Rows !!!! - The users are shouting Unacceptable !!! (i will do the same) .. If somebody can make sense of this . It will be real useful.

Cheers
Ganesh

On Wed, 13 Oct 2004 23:16:30 +0200, Stephane Faroult <sfaroult_at_roughsea.com> wrote:
> (Sorry, had to remove the execution plans to avoid overquoting) That's an
> interesting one, and very illustrative of what I dislike in the ANSI syntax.
> In the old syntax, all tables in the FROM clause are (roughly) equal. With
> the ANSI syntax, you SELECT from *one* table, which is joined to others -
> primum inter pares (in plain English, more equal than the others). You
> totally lose the symmetry. The ANSI syntax takes it (pretty obviously) as
> the driving table - not the Oracle syntax. I guess that finding the proper
> driving table with the ANSI syntax musn't be a piece of cake for the
> optimizer, because you put it, from the very start, on some rails. If the
> wrong table was specified in the FROM clause, tough luck.
>
> Stephane Faroult
>
>
>
> Ganesh Raja wrote:
> Lex,

Not sure If Oracle-L Accepts Attachments ..

Here are the Queries and
> the Plan.

Thanks for the help.

Rgds,
Ganesh

On Wed, 13 Oct 2004 19:58:55
> +0200, Lex de Haan

<lex.de.haan_at_naturaljoin.nl> wrote:

> you might want to provide the two statements you are talking about?
and
> maybe even the two corresponding execution plans?

Kind
> regards,

Lex.

visit
> http://www.naturaljoin.nl

skype me
> <callto://lexdehaan>

-----Original Message-----
From:
> oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org

[mailto:oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org]On
> Behalf Of Ganesh Raja

Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2004 18:54
To:
> jkstill_at_gmail.com

Cc: smishra_97_at_yahoo.com; oracle-l_at_freelists.org Subject:
> Re: Sincere Advice on Sql Plan - Thanks

Okay I am Going to Piggy Back on
> this ..

I have an ANSI SQL which when Rewriiten Using Oracle Syntax it
> seems

to take a Better plan to execute it .. Any ideas why this
> is

happening.

There is a Total Change in the plan and it works much faster
> than the

ANSI Counterpart

Any help is appreciated.

Thanks.

Cheers
Ganesh
> R

--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l

 
>
--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l

Received on Wed Oct 13 2004 - 16:22:43 CDT