RE: Exadata Tuning Question+

From: Iggy Fernandez <iggy_fernandez_at_hotmail.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2014 21:05:11 -0800
Message-ID: <BLU179-W32994E3813BB7EC292666AEB820_at_phx.gbl>

re: 25X more rows
That should be 125X more rows. Or not. We can't really tell based on the information provided.

From: iggy_fernandez_at_hotmail.com
To: jonathan_at_jlcomp.demon.co.uk; oracle-l_at_freelists.org Subject: RE: Exadata Tuning Question+
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2014 20:59:15 -0800

I take it back. With incomplete information to draw upon, it's a good guess that SERVICE_RELATIONSHIP is a big table. Perhaps SID is the primary key of SERVICE_LOOKUP and, since the query wants a comma-delimited list of RELATED_SID values, perhaps SERVICE_RELATIONSHIP has 25X more rows than SERVICE_LOOKUP. Hence we have 35 million full table scans of a monster table compared to the single scan that is actually needed. Iggy

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

Received on Sat Nov 08 2014 - 06:05:11 CET