From oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org Wed Sep 7 14:21:14 2005 Return-Path: Received: from air891.startdedicated.com (root@localhost) by orafaq.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id j87JLE9j023033 for ; Wed, 7 Sep 2005 14:21:14 -0500 X-ClientAddr: 206.53.239.180 Received: from turing.freelists.org (freelists-180.iquest.net [206.53.239.180]) by air891.startdedicated.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id j87JLAIP023020 for ; Wed, 7 Sep 2005 14:21:10 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id 3ED991E9608; Wed, 7 Sep 2005 14:21:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from turing.freelists.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (turing [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 12594-10; Wed, 7 Sep 2005 14:21:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from turing (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id AC5EF1E9771; Wed, 7 Sep 2005 14:21:04 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <1126120752.7883.242387885@webmail.messagingengine.com> X-Sasl-Enc: 5PhprIbsANzIzzq7Vr5BRemhkzCzcaWeJacc8+4d9L1D 1126120752 From: "GovindanK" To: oracle-l@freelists.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_----------=_112612075278830"; charset="ISO-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Table Replicated,index not used-BitOld Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2005 12:19:12 -0700 X-archive-position: 25112 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org Errors-To: oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org X-original-sender: gkatteri@fastmail.fm Precedence: normal Reply-To: gkatteri@fastmail.fm X-list: oracle-l X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-20030616-p9 (Debian) at avenirtech.net X-mailscan-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-mailscan-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-MailScanner-From: oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on air891.startdedicated.com X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=ham version=2.63 --_----------=_112612075278830 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MIME::Lite 1.5 (F2.73; T1.001; A1.64; B3.05; Q3.03) Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2005 19:19:12 UT Hello Team I need your help on this. We were on 9.2.0.1 on solaris and had two instances running on two separate machines; One was production (PRD) and the other for administration/accounting related (SHD). We have table replicated from PRD to SHD; The number of distinct keys in both were the same and so is the number of rows ; The query on prd returns results in few seconds while on the shd instance it took long time without any hints ; with hint it processes faster. The clustering factor was high [1]http://www.geocities.com/dba_assist/oracle-l/prd.html [2]http://www.geocities.com/dba_assist/oracle-l/shd.html First i rebuilt the index ; There was no improvement in the statistics. Dropped , Recreated, Analyzed .. No improvement. We later migrated to 9.2.0.6 and now both the instances are taking same(=more) time and doing FTS. If the optimizer could use the index on the first occassion in PRD+9201 why it does not do it now? Any suggestions would be appreciated. TIA GovindanK References 1. http://www.geocities.com/dba_assist/oracle-l/prd.html 2. http://www.geocities.com/dba_assist/oracle-l/shd.html --_----------=_112612075278830 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MIME::Lite 1.5 (F2.73; T1.001; A1.64; B3.05; Q3.03) Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2005 19:19:12 UT Table Replicated,index not used-BitOld

Hello Team

I need your=A0help on this. We were on 9.2.0.1 on s= olaris and had two instances running on two separate machines; One was prod= uction (PRD) and the other for administration/accounting related (SHD). We = have table replicated from PRD to SHD; The number of distinct keys in both = were the same and so is the number of rows ; The query on prd returns resul= ts in few seconds while on the shd instance it took long time without any h= ints ; with hint it processes faster. The clustering factor was high

http://w= ww.geocities.com/dba_assist/oracle-l/prd.html

http://www.geocities.com/dba= _assist/oracle-l/shd.html

First i rebuilt the index ; There was n= o improvement in the statistics. Dropped , Recreated, Analyzed .. No improv= ement. We later migrated to 9.2.0.6 and now both=A0 the instances are takin= g same(=3Dmore) time and doing FTS.=A0 If the optimizer could use the index= on the first occassion in PRD+9201 why it does not do it now?

Any s= uggestions would be appreciated.

TIA

GovindanK

--_----------=_112612075278830-- -- http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l