Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid |
![]() |
![]() |
Home -> Community -> Mailing Lists -> Oracle-L -> Re: RE: query slow in 9i, but not slow in 8i
is this on metalink or in the docs anywhere? I never saw it? You would think that oracle would warn you about over-using histograms. I guess I have to be more careful now.
If I use options=>'GATHER AUTO' does oracle make a decision to use histograms? If so, what causes that decision?
>
> From: "Jonathan Lewis" <jonathan_at_jlcomp.demon.co.uk>
> Date: 2004/03/02 Tue AM 03:37:12 EST
> To: <oracle-l_at_freelists.org>
> Subject: Re: RE: query slow in 9i, but not slow in 8i
>
>
> Note in-line
>
> Regards
>
> Jonathan Lewis
> http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk
>
> The Co-operative Oracle Users' FAQ
> http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/faq/ind_faq.html
>
> March 2004 Hotsos Symposium - The Burden of Proof
> Dynamic Sampling - an investigation
> March 2004 Charlotte OUG (www.cltoug.org) CBO Tutorial
> April 2004 Iceland
> June 2004 UK - Optimising Oracle Seminar
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mark Richard" <mrichard_at_transurban.com.au>
> >
> > I am unfortunately speaking from heresay, however I heard once that having
> > histograms all over the place can slow down parsing as they have to be
> > inspected. I was left with the impression that unless the data is skewed
> > enough to warrant a histogram then there actually is a negative cost
> > associated with having too many histograms.
> >
>
> I have to disagree with part of Wolfgang's comment.
>
> To use a histogram, Oracle has to load it into memory,
> then compare predicate values with end-points before
> producing a selectivity value.
>
> If you have histograms on every single column in the
> database, that's a lot of memory to load - and it seems
> to be protected by only one latch. The incremental
> CPU cost of using the histogram for any one optimisation
> call is probably not significant - but the infrastructure
> cost is.
>
> If you have a perfect system, that uses a few distinct
> thousand SQL statements, and optimises them just
> once, then the overhead is irrelevant. If you have a
> typical system, then it's another nail in the coffin.
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe send email to: oracle-l-request_at_freelists.org
> put 'unsubscribe' in the subject line.
> --
> Archives are at http://www.freelists.org/archives/oracle-l/
> FAQ is at http://www.freelists.org/help/fom-serve/cache/1.html
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
-- Archives are at http://www.freelists.org/archives/oracle-l/ FAQ is at http://www.freelists.org/help/fom-serve/cache/1.html -----------------------------------------------------------------Received on Tue Mar 02 2004 - 06:48:35 CST
![]() |
![]() |