Re: using single table costing more than using JOINS
Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2007 23:53:43 -0700
On Aug 8, 1:59 am, sybra..._at_hccnet.nl wrote:
> On Tue, 07 Aug 2007 09:49:21 -0700, Aravindh <knaravind..._at_gmail.com>
> >I have a large table called as JP_HISTORY_TBL. This has about 10
> >million rows.
> >I did a select * from jp_history_tbl where assigned_to_pg_new =
> >It did a full table scan and the cost is 10085
> >Now I joined the JP_HISTORY_TBL with another table called as
> >ps_rf_provider_grp TABLE. This table when joined brings down the cost
> >and the time of execution drastically
> >select * from jp_history_tbl a,ps_rf_provider_grp b where
> >a.assigned_to_pg_new = 'IS00000025' and a.assigned_to_pg_new =
> >It brings down the Cost drastically to just 83..
> >Then I am totally CONFUSED of why we should create a flattened table
> >to store all the data. We are in the process of creating a flattened
> >table which will contain the description (which is there in the
> >PS_RF_PROVIDER_GRP table).. Now looking at the above cost we feel that
> >our approach itself it totally illogical and IRRELEVANT.
> >I want to know how ppl are designing big big warehousses with immense
> >amount of flattened data...
> Just curious: why do you think reposting will get you better answers?
> This is the second time you post this in the wrong group and the
> second time without version and WITHOUT EXPLAIN PLAN results!!
> Why do you insist on calling out for crystal balls?
> Next time: please either post with sufficient details, or (in the
> event that is asked to much, as you don't have a problem with people
> wasting their free time with helping you out for free) better still:
> don't post at all, and go to Oracle Technical Support.
> At least those monkeys are getting paid to address your query, and
> having you submit evidence for months.
> Sybrand Bakker
> Senior Oracle DBA- Hide quoted text -
> - Show quoted text -
I am very sorry for not furnishing the correct details..Totally sorry about that.. I will send out a separate mail to you since I am not able to attach a word document in this forum. Totally sorry again.
KN Aravindh Received on Wed Aug 08 2007 - 08:53:43 CEST