Re: Large # Items in IN () Very Slow

From: Jonathan D. Trumbull <Jonathan.Trumbull_at_abbott.com>
Date: 4 Nov 2002 11:59:39 -0800
Message-ID: <266c2da3.0211041159.606de85e@posting.google.com>

Jonathan and all,

The problem was that oracle wasn't using the INLIST ITERATOR to perform the query. The reason is that the column definition was a VARCHAR and I was listing the items in the IN clause as integers. Apparently Oracle isn't smart enough to deal with this...okay, I guess the truth is that _I_ am too dumb for the DB!

I actually learned quite a bit chasing dead ends to this problem.

--Jonathan

"Jonathan Lewis" <jonathan_at_jlcomp.demon.co.uk> wrote in message news:<app2at$kig$1$8302bc10_at_news.demon.co.uk>...
> There are a couple of oddities in the
> query and the execution path you've
> posted.

Yes, in the explain_plan I put a count(*) to force a full read. Sorry for the confusion. Received on Mon Nov 04 2002 - 13:59:39 CST