RE: Materialized Views 9i vs 10g

From: Michael Dinh <mdinh_at_XIFIN.Com>
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2010 11:29:20 -0700
Message-ID: <>

You might want to take a look at the atomic refresh option. If I remember correctly, the default value change in 10g.

exec dbms_mview.refresh('<mview_name>','C',atomic_refresh=>FALSE)

Also, take a look at Doc 365157.1

We had to specify atomic_refresh=>FALSE in the refresh.

Let me know if you have questions.

Michael Dinh : XIFIN : 858.436.2929

NOTICE OF CONFIDENTIALITY - This material is intended for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable laws. BE FURTHER ADVISED THAT THIS EMAIL MAY CONTAIN PROTECTED HEALTH INFORMATION (PHI). BY ACCEPTING THIS MESSAGE, YOU ACKNOWLEDGE THE FOREGOING, AND AGREE AS FOLLOWS: YOU AGREE TO NOT DISCLOSE TO ANY THIRD PARTY ANY PHI CONTAINED HEREIN, EXCEPT AS EXPRESSLY PERMITTED AND ONLY TO THE EXTENT NECESSARY TO PERFORM YOUR OBLIGATIONS RELATING TO THE RECEIPT OF THIS MESSAGE. If the reader of this email (and attachments) is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. Please notify the sender of the error and delete the e-mail you received. Thank you. From: [] On Behalf Of Chuck Boddy Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 8:48 AM
To: oracle-l
Subject: Materialized Views 9i vs 10g

I am taking Materialized Views that were initially built on a 9i database and rebuilding them on a 10g database - verbatim. I am noticing that the performance is noticeably degraded. Checked out the Explain Plan on 9i vs 10g for some the materialized views, and they would indicate that on 10g, the materialized views should at least perform the same OR performance should be approved. Any ideas would be appreciated.


Received on Thu Aug 19 2010 - 13:29:20 CDT

Original text of this message