Re: Sudden plan change related to "VIEW PUSHED PREDICATE" with cost difference of 1M VS 13G

From: Pap <oracle.developer35_at_gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 16 May 2022 17:23:36 +0530
Message-ID: <CAEjw_fiq5v+9Qr8r6wCwBq48K-u+TmCGNM+78g-XiTR=NC9Siw_at_mail.gmail.com>



Dont have DML rights on prod so explain plan is not working for me for this MERGE but i fetched it from admin guys. Below is the plan with OFE ('12.1.0.2') and removing ordered hint. And i am seeing same plan even by just removing ordered hint.

Also something interesting, when i ran it as a SELECT statement, its going for thr JPPD , so it seems , its the MERGE query which is facing some blocking transformation. And i am seeing hint added as /*+ NO_MERGE */ in the unparsed query in the 10053 trace, not sure if its expected or point towards any oddity?

And another interesting thing , when i had tried by pushing the hint which Andy suggested i.e to make the plan as HASH JOIN + FULL SCAN , but the resulted plan was totally different though. It was nested loop + indexed access. But the sql is getting finished with that path. So we can definitely push this as a profile. And this plan is having cost ~1M i.e. lot less than the path its currently opting for by default. Still unknown about the exact root cause/bug fix which is causing though. But we have atleast got a workaround. Thank you so much.

Posted the above plans in below link.

https://gist.github.com/oracle9999/b3ff18f62f2ba6d0c0ffe448895e1046

On Fri, 13 May 2022, 4:35 pm Noveljic Nenad, <nenad.noveljic_at_vontobel.com> wrote:

> Have you considered following action plan?
>
> “
>
> - Generate the plan without optimizer_features_enabled (according to
> the outline it is set to 11.2.0.4)
> - Remove the ORDERED hint and check if it has any impact
> - Duplicate the database and upgrade it to 19c just to see if the
> problem reproduces in a newer release
>
> “
>
> The first two points are trivial and don’t require much effort.
>
>
>
> *From:* Pap <oracle.developer35_at_gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Freitag, 13. Mai 2022 07:21
> *To:* Noveljic Nenad <nenad.noveljic_at_vontobel.com>
> *Cc:* Oracle L <oracle-l_at_freelists.org>; Andy Sayer <andysayer_at_gmail.com>;
> Mohamed Houri <mohamed.houri_at_gmail.com>
> *Subject:* Re: Sudden plan change related to "VIEW PUSHED PREDICATE" with
> cost difference of 1M VS 13G
>
>
>
> **** E-Mail from outside Vontobel:* Do not click on links or open
> attachments unless you know the content is safe. ***
>
> * _at_Nenad *
>
> *"Are there any lines between the two lines mentioned above (“updated best
> state” and “Will not use JPPD” that might give the reason for not using
> JPPD? "*
>
> There are no lines between these two in the trace file.
>
>
>
> On Fri, May 13, 2022 at 1:45 AM Noveljic Nenad <
> nenad.noveljic_at_vontobel.com> wrote:
>
> Hello Pap
>
>
>
> I revisited my suggestion about column statistics - it was wrong. The low
> selectivity led to the JPPD transformation cost similar to the one that was
> in the plan with JPPD.
>
> JPPD: Updated best state, Cost = 39.073380
>
>
>
> If we multiply the cost above with the number of rows of the outer query
> block and add the cost of the outer join query block, we get the total cost
> of the plan with JPPD. It’s much lower than the plan without JPPD and
> similar to the cost of the good plan you’ve had previously:
>
> 20710 * 39.073380 + ~260K ~ 1M
>
>
>
> So JPPD should definitely be selected.
>
>
>
> The optimizer figured out that correctly and updated the best state with
> the cost of JPPD (39.07 is the cost of a single iteration):
>
>
>
> JPPD: Updated best state, Cost = 39.073380
>
>
>
> But then, it discarded it soon, for still unknown reason:
>
>
>
> JPPD: Will not use JPPD from query block SEL$B29E968D
>
>
>
> You mentioned that you edited out some lines from the optimizer trace. Are
> there any lines between the two lines mentioned above (“updated best state”
> and “Will not use JPPD” that might give the reason for not using JPPD? As
> already mentioned, the cost isn’t the reason.
>
>
>
> If not, the following might be the reason:
>
> A Optimizer applied some heuristics without logging it or
>
> B The correct decision got overridden due to a bug
>
>
>
> Could you try following:
>
> - Generate the plan without optimizer_features_enabled (according to
> the outline it is set to 11.2.0.4)
> - Remove the ORDERED hint and check if it has any impact
> - Duplicate the database and upgrade it to 19c just to see if the
> problem reproduces in a newer release
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>
>
> Nenad
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________
>
> Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
>
> Bitte denken Sie an die Umwelt, bevor Sie dieses E-Mail drucken.
>
>
> Important Notice
>
> This message is intended only for the individual named. It may contain
> confidential or privileged information. If you are not the named addressee
> you should in particular not disseminate, distribute, modify or copy this
> e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail, if you have
> received this message by mistake and delete it from your system.
> Without prejudice to any contractual agreements between you and us which
> shall prevail in any case, we take it as your authorization to correspond
> with you by e-mail if you send us messages by e-mail. However, we reserve
> the right not to execute orders and instructions transmitted by e-mail at
> any time and without further explanation.
> E-mail transmission may not be secure or error-free as information could
> be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete. Also
> processing of incoming e-mails cannot be guaranteed. All liability of
> Vontobel Holding Ltd. and any of its affiliates (hereinafter collectively
> referred to as "Vontobel Group") for any damages resulting from e-mail use
> is excluded. You are advised that urgent and time sensitive messages should
> not be sent by e-mail and if verification is required please request a
> printed version.
> Please note that all e-mail communications to and from the Vontobel Group
> are subject to electronic storage and review by Vontobel Group. Unless
> stated to the contrary and without prejudice to any contractual agreements
> between you and Vontobel Group which shall prevail in any case,
> e-mail-communication is for informational purposes only and is not intended
> as an offer or solicitation for the purchase or sale of any financial
> instrument or as an official confirmation of any transaction.
> The legal basis for the processing of your personal data is the legitimate
> interest to develop a commercial relationship with you, as well as your
> consent to forward you commercial communications. You can exercise, at any
> time and under the terms established under current regulation, your rights.
> If you prefer not to receive any further communications, please contact
> your client relationship manager if you are a client of Vontobel Group or
> notify the sender. Please note for an exact reference to the affected group
> entity the corporate e-mail signature. For further information about data
> privacy at Vontobel Group please consult www.vontobel.com.
>

--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Received on Mon May 16 2022 - 13:53:36 CEST

Original text of this message