RE: Correlated subquery performance in 8i & 9i
imizer=CHOOSE (Cost=6 Card=1 Bytes=15) 10 NESTED LOOPS (SEMI) (Cost=6 Card=1 Bytes=15) 21 TABLE ACCESS (BY INDEX ROWID) OF 'CODE_MASTER' (Cost=4 Card=1 Bytes=11) 32 INDEX (RANGE SCAN) OF 'CM_FD_IDX' (NON-UNIQUE) (Cost=3 Card=1) 41 INDEX (RANGE SCAN) OF 'CD_CODE_IDX' (NON-UNIQUE) (Cost=2 Card=299600 Bytes=1198400) Anyway, Gaja, are you out there? I'm interested in what this person was referring to. Reading between the lines of what the person posted, I am guessing that he was referring to the ability to get a hash join, when desired, by re-writing as an in-line view. And that in 9i the CBO can automagically pick to correlate or hash a correlated query (though we still have the ability to un-correlate a correlated query in 8i). Regards, Larry G. Elkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] 214.954.1781 > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > BALA,PRAKASH (Non-HP-USA,ex1) > Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 2:12 PM > To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L > Subject: Correlated subquery performance in 8i & 9i > > > Learnt the following from Gaja's seminar last week. So just wanted to pass > this on: > > Inline views works better than correlated subqueries in 8i. > > But things have changed in 9i. Gaja proved to us by showing a > tkprof output. > This is because Oracle has changed their logic while processing a > correlated > subquery. > > HTH! > > Prakash -- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com -- Author: Larry Elkins INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fat City Network Services-- (858) 538-5051 FAX: (858) 538-5051 San Diego, California-- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing). -- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com -- Author: BALA,PRAKASH (Non-HP-USA,ex1) INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fat City Network Services-- (858) 538-5051 FAX: (858) 538-5051 San Diego, California-- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).
RE: Correlated subquery performance in 8i & 9i
ou out there? I'm interested in what this person was referring to. Reading between the lines of what the person posted, I am guessing that he was referring to the ability to get a hash join, when desired, by re-writing as an in-line view. And that in 9i the CBO can automagically pick to correlate or hash a correlated query (though we still have the ability to un-correlate a correlated query in 8i). Regards, Larry G. Elkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] 214.954.1781 > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > BALA,PRAKASH (Non-HP-USA,ex1) > Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 2:12 PM > To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L > Subject: Correlated subquery performance in 8i & 9i > > > Learnt the following from Gaja's seminar last week. So just wanted to pass > this on: > > Inline views works better than correlated subqueries in 8i. > > But things have changed in 9i. Gaja proved to us by showing a > tkprof output. > This is because Oracle has changed their logic while processing a > correlated > subquery. > > HTH! > > Prakash -- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com -- Author: Larry Elkins INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fat City Network Services-- (858) 538-5051 FAX: (858) 538-5051 San Diego, California-- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).
Re: Correlated subquery performance in 8i & 9i
so I have to rewrite the inline view query I just managed to get working? sigh --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I also "discovered" that at Gaja's seminar. > > Isn't that special? What will Oracle do for us next? > > Jared > > > > > > > "BALA,PRAKASH (Non-HP-USA,ex1)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > 09/05/2002 12:11 PM > Please respond to ORACLE-L > > > To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > cc: > Subject:Correlated subquery performance in 8i & 9i > > > Learnt the following from Gaja's seminar last week. So just wanted to > pass > this on: > > Inline views works better than correlated subqueries in 8i. > > But things have changed in 9i. Gaja proved to us by showing a tkprof > output. > This is because Oracle has changed their logic while processing a > correlated > subquery. > > HTH! > > Prakash > -- > Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com > -- > Author: BALA,PRAKASH (Non-HP-USA,ex1) > INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Fat City Network Services-- (858) 538-5051 FAX: (858) 538-5051 > San Diego, California-- Public Internet access / Mailing > Lists > > To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message > to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in > the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L > (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may > also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing). > > > > -- > Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com > -- > Author: > INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Fat City Network Services-- (858) 538-5051 FAX: (858) 538-5051 > San Diego, California-- Public Internet access / Mailing > Lists > > To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message > to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in > the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L > (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may > also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing). __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes http://finance.yahoo.com -- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com -- Author: Rachel Carmichael INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fat City Network Services-- (858) 538-5051 FAX: (858) 538-5051 San Diego, California-- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).
Re: Correlated subquery performance in 8i & 9i
I also "discovered" that at Gaja's seminar.
Isn't that special? What will Oracle do for us next?
Jared
"BALA,PRAKASH (Non-HP-USA,ex1)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
09/05/2002 12:11 PM
Please respond to ORACLE-L
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cc:
Subject: Correlated subquery performance in 8i & 9i
Learnt the following from Gaja's seminar last week. So just wanted to pass
this on:
Inline views works better than correlated subqueries in 8i.
But things have changed in 9i. Gaja proved to us by showing a tkprof
output.
This is because Oracle has changed their logic while processing a
correlated
subquery.
HTH!
Prakash
--
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
--
Author: BALA,PRAKASH (Non-HP-USA,ex1)
INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fat City Network Services-- (858) 538-5051 FAX: (858) 538-5051
San Diego, California-- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists
To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
(or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may
also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).
--
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
--
Author:
INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fat City Network Services-- (858) 538-5051 FAX: (858) 538-5051
San Diego, California-- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists
To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
(or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may
also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).
Correlated subquery performance in 8i & 9i
Learnt the following from Gaja's seminar last week. So just wanted to pass this on: Inline views works better than correlated subqueries in 8i. But things have changed in 9i. Gaja proved to us by showing a tkprof output. This is because Oracle has changed their logic while processing a correlated subquery. HTH! Prakash -- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com -- Author: BALA,PRAKASH (Non-HP-USA,ex1) INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fat City Network Services-- (858) 538-5051 FAX: (858) 538-5051 San Diego, California-- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).
