Re: Number 1 gripe about CBO: 0 <Cardinality< 1 (?????)

On Apr 6, 9:09 am, "Kevin Kirkpatrick" <kvnkrkpt..._at_gmail.com> wrote:
> On Apr 6, 10:21 am, DA Morgan <damor..._at_psoug.org> wrote:
>
> > Kevin Kirkpatrick wrote:
> > >> Slamming someone who is trying to help you will likely do nothing to
> > >> help you resolve the issue that you are experiencing.
>
> > > I have little sympathy. To me, the tone of sybra's responses #4 and
> > > #6 came across as somebody ....
>
> > If you came here looking for good advice you got it.
>
> Did I ask for assistance with the production problem? Is the group
> name "comp.databases.oracle.advice"? I thought the group was for
> miscellaneous discussion about the Oracle products, allowing for both
> advisement but also including airing criticisms of the logic of the
> CBO.
That is correct, and personally, I would encourage you to do so.

>
> My primary goal here was to present my case that the CBO logic is
> flawed to a forum visited by Oracle experts who might be able to
> understand the issue and either voice agreement or, better yet, offer
> cogent counter-arguments.

Experts come and go here. Sometimes one lurking will see something interesting and privately invite many others.

>
> > If you were looking for people paid to be nice to you ...
> > metalink.oracle.com.
>
> Why file a TAR for something that, thus far, is merely my opinion and
> a single test case? Why not first express my opinion to a forum where
> people more knowledgable about Oracle than I might take interest and
> even present valid arguments (perhaps even test cases) that the
> current CBO logic yields better plans?

Have you checked out Jonathan's site? http://jonathanlewis.wordpress.com/ (hopefully you checked out Charles' links earlier in this thread, which I should have found and posted).

I think you may be complaining about two separate CBO issues, information which is displayed in a misleading manner, and incorrect costing.

For these sorts of posts, you pretty much have to display complete test cases. That can often kickstart a very informative thread.

>
> > That doesn't mean we shouldn't be civil and respectful. But all of us
> > here do this in a few seconds or minutes grabbed before a meeting or
> > while waiting for a query to finish. Most of us focus on short,
> > focused, responses. Not the nuances with which someone might choose
> > to interpret our responses.
>
> Fair enough. I suppose that despite the group name not including
> "advice", a plethora of <newbie-seeking-advice> posts might lead to
> knee-jerk reactions to any given post of skimming for keywords ("bad
> plan") and immediately responding: "here's 3 simple things you are
> probably doing wrong" before running off the their 10 a.m.
>
>

And you think cdt is better? :-)

But seriously, this medium does tend to encourage shorter posts, though long detailed posts such as Charles often makes are to be commended. Note that Sybrand's response to your original post was that it had insufficient information. It is fairly difficult to set the context correctly in an original post, especially a deeply technical post, one has to remember not everyone is going to know exactly where you are coming from.

jg

--
@home.com is bogus.
http://www.rageboy.com/statements-sierra-locke.html