Shouldn't you pass the NO_CACHE hint for the LIMIT-OFFSET queries, since you will be reading and filtering out lots of rows on the server? I guess using the block cache for RVC queries might help depending on how many rows you read per query, you should be able to easily test this out.
On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 4:25 AM, Abhishek Gupta <abhila...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Team, > > I am working on a use case where SQL aggregated queries are made such that > RVC cannot be used (aggregation on truncated primary key columns) instead > LIMIT-OFFSET has to be used. RVC is used for some user user cases > > Currently I have disabled BLOCKCACHE for the table. I wanted to check if > it would be more performant to instead enable BLOCKCACHE on the table and > pass NO_CACHE hint for RVC queries because it uses non-LIMIT-OFFSET scans > and not pass NO_CACHE for the LIMIT-OFFSET queries so that for the > subsequent page calls can leverage prior page data in block cache. > > Thanks, > Abhishek >
