Home » RDBMS Server » Performance Tuning » Query running way too slow (Oracle 9.2.0.8 (HP-UX))
Query running way too slow [message #477733] Mon, 04 October 2010 02:47 Go to next message
indrajit2002
Messages: 53
Registered: November 2007
Location: INDIA
Member
Hi,
We used to execute the query contrt_edw.sql in prod database and it used to run good,but our developers changed the query and developed contr_edw_v2a and since then it started running too slow. I have attached the links to see the queries and also the explain plan of the new developed query which is running slow.


The original query is

SELECT     SUBSTR(dt.fisc_mo_cd,3,4)||SUBSTR(dt.fisc_mo_cd,8,2)||'|'|| 
    T9.CORE_SRC_REG_ID||'|'||
    T9.CORE_REG_NM||'|'||
        T9.CORE_SRC_DIV_ID||'|'||
    T9.CORE_DIV_NM||'|'||
        T7.INDV_CUST_NM||'|'||
        T7.INDV_CUST_NO||'|'||
    DECODE(nvl(T7.INDV_CUST_NO,'*'), '*', T7.INDV_CUST_NO || ' - ' || T7.INDV_CUST_NM, T7.INDV_CUST_NO || ' - ' || T7.INDV_CUST_NM)||'|'||
        'HOLD' ||'|'||  -- decode(nvl(t7.BG_ID_NO,'*'),'*',decode(t7.GOVT_COT_IND,'Y','Government','WCPP'),'Buying Group')||'|'||
      decode(SUBSTR(t1.CONTR_PRD_TIER_NO,1,7),'0000000', 'Non-Contract', 'Contract')||'|'||
    T5.BG_ID_NO||'|'||
    T5.BG_NM||'|'||
        'Endo-Mechanical'||'|'||
        'Endo-Mechanical'||'|'||
        T3.DIV_NM||'|'||
    T3.DIV_CD||'|'||
    T3.MJR_GRP_NM||'|'||
    T3.MJR_GRP_CD||'|'||
    T3.MNR_GRP_NM||'|'||
    T3.MNR_GRP_CD||'|'||
    T3.BASE_PROD_CD||'|'||
        SUBSTR(t1.CONTR_PRD_TIER_NO,1,7)||'|'||
        T6.CONTR_TIER_TXT||'|'||
        T2.CONTR_STRNG_NM||'|'||
        SUBSTR(t1.CONTR_PRD_TIER_NO,1,7)||' - '||t2.CONTR_STRNG_NM||'|'||
        SUM((T3.COACT_SCOST_AMT * T1.PROD_QTY)*decode(t9.CORE_pct_SPLT_NO,'.3333','.333333',t9.CORE_pct_SPLT_NO))||'|'||
        SUM(T1.PROD_QTY * decode(t9.CORE_pct_SPLT_NO,'.3333','.333333',t9.CORE_pct_SPLT_NO))||'|'||
        SUM((T1.PROD_SLS_AMT)*decode(t9.CORE_pct_SPLT_NO,'.3333','.333333',t9.CORE_pct_SPLT_NO))||'|'||
        SUM((T1.PROD_LST_AMT)*decode(t9.CORE_pct_SPLT_NO,'.3333','.333333',t9.CORE_pct_SPLT_NO))||'|'||
        SUM((T1.PROD_LST_AMT-T1.PROD_SLS_AMT)*decode(t9.CORE_pct_SPLT_NO,'.3333','.333333',t9.CORE_pct_SPLT_NO))||'|'||
        SUM((T1.PROD_SLS_AMT-T3.COACT_SCOST_AMT)*decode(t9.CORE_pct_SPLT_NO,'.3333','.333333',t9.CORE_pct_SPLT_NO))||'|'||
        SUM((T4.PRC_BOOK_AMT*T1.PROD_QTY)*decode(t9.CORE_pct_SPLT_NO,'.3333','.333333',t9.CORE_pct_SPLT_NO))||'|'||
    T9.IDN_DESCN_NM_TXT
FROM  FACT_CNSMR_SLS T1 INNER JOIN  DIM_CUST_MV T7 ON T1.cust_be_id = T7.object_id
      INNER JOIN DIM_PROD T3 ON T1.fg_be_id = T3.be_id
      INNER JOIN DIM_PROD_PRC_BOOK_MV T4 ON T3.base_prod_oid = T4.base_prod_oid
      INNER JOIN DIM_CUST_ALGN_MV T9 ON T1.cust_be_id = T9.cust_be_id
      INNER JOIN DIM_BUYG_GRP T5 ON T1.BG_ID_NO_BE_ID = T5.BE_ID
      INNER JOIN DIM_TM_MV DT ON T1.COMP_dt_be_id= dt.be_id
      LEFT OUTER JOIN CONTR@EESCIP20 T2 ON SUBSTR(t1.CONTR_PRD_TIER_NO,1,7) = T2.CONTR_NO
      LEFT OUTER JOIN CONTR_PRD_TIER@EESCIP20 T6 ON 
            t1.CONTR_PRD_TIER_NO = T6.CONTR_NO||T6.CONTR_PRD_NO||T6.CONTR_TIER_NO
WHERE
          dt.fy_cd      >= 'FY2009'
and    T1.rptg_yr_cd in ('2009','2010')
AND    trunc(sysdate-to_char(sysdate+1,'D')) BETWEEN T5.START_DATE AND T5.end_date
AND    trunc(sysdate-to_char(sysdate+1,'D')) BETWEEN T3.START_DATE AND T3.end_date
AND    T4.PRC_BOOK_TYP_CD = 'D'
AND    to_date(T1.RPTG_YR_CD||T1.RPTG_YR_MO||'15','YYYYMMDD') between
		T4.PROD_PRC_BOOK_FISC_STRT_DT and T4.PROD_PRC_BOOK_FISC_END_DT
AND    T9.CURRENT_FLG = 'Y'
AND    T7.CURRENT_FLG = 'Y'
and    T9.algn_strc_cd = 'AS11'
AND    T7.INDV_CUST_STT_CD <> 'ZZ'
GROUP BY    SUBSTR(dt.fisc_mo_cd,3,4)||SUBSTR(dt.fisc_mo_cd,8,2)||'|'|| 
    T9.CORE_SRC_REG_ID,
    T9.CORE_REG_NM,
        T9.CORE_SRC_DIV_ID,
    T9.CORE_DIV_NM,
        T7.INDV_CUST_NM,
        T7.INDV_CUST_NO,
    DECODE(nvl(T7.INDV_CUST_NO,'*'), '*', T7.INDV_CUST_NO || ' - ' || T7.INDV_CUST_NM, T7.INDV_CUST_NO || ' - ' || T7.INDV_CUST_NM),
      decode(SUBSTR(t1.CONTR_PRD_TIER_NO,1,7),'0000000', 'Non-Contract', 'Contract'),
    T5.BG_ID_NO,
    T5.BG_NM,
        T3.DIV_NM,
    T3.DIV_CD,
    T3.MJR_GRP_NM,
    T3.MJR_GRP_CD,
    T3.MNR_GRP_NM,
    T3.MNR_GRP_CD,
    T3.BASE_PROD_CD,
        SUBSTR(t1.CONTR_PRD_TIER_NO,1,7),
        T6.CONTR_TIER_TXT,
        T2.CONTR_STRNG_NM,
        SUBSTR(t1.CONTR_PRD_TIER_NO,1,7)||' - '||t2.CONTR_STRNG_NM,
    T9.IDN_DESCN_NM_TXT;




SPOOL OFF

exit;


And the updated query is

SELECT   a.FISC_YR_MO||'|'|| 
    a.CORE_SRC_REG_ID||'|'||
    a.CORE_REG_NM||'|'||
    a.CORE_SRC_DIV_ID||'|'||
    a.CORE_DIV_NM||'|'||
    a.INDV_CUST_NM||'|'||
    a.INDV_CUST_NO||'|'||
    DECODE(nvl(a.INDV_CUST_NO,'*'), '*', a.INDV_CUST_NO || ' - ' || a.INDV_CUST_NM, a.INDV_CUST_NO || ' - ' || a.INDV_CUST_NM)||'|'||
        'HOLD' ||'|'||  -- decode(nvl(t7.BG_ID_NO,'*'),'*',decode(t7.GOVT_COT_IND,'Y','Government','WCPP'),'Buying Group')||'|'||
    decode(b.CONTR_NO,'0000000', 'Non-Contract', 'Contract')||'|'||
    a.BG_ID_NO||'|'||
    a.BG_NM||'|'||
    'Endo-Mechanical'||'|'||
    'Endo-Mechanical'||'|'||
    a.DIV_NM||'|'||
    a.DIV_CD||'|'||
    a.MJR_GRP_NM||'|'||
    a.MJR_GRP_CD||'|'||
    a.MNR_GRP_NM||'|'||
    a.MNR_GRP_CD||'|'||
    a.BASE_PROD_CD||'|'||
    b.CONTR_NO||'|'||b.CONTR_TIER_TXT||'|'||
    b.CONTR_STRNG_NM||'|'||
    b.CONTR_NO||' - '||b.CONTR_STRNG_NM||'|'||
    ((a.COACT_SCOST_AMT * a.PROD_QTY)*decode(a.CORE_pct_SPLT_NO,'.3333','.333333',a.CORE_pct_SPLT_NO))||'|'||
    (a.PROD_QTY * decode(a.CORE_pct_SPLT_NO,'.3333','.333333',a.CORE_pct_SPLT_NO))||'|'||
    ((a.PROD_SLS_AMT)*decode(a.CORE_pct_SPLT_NO,'.3333','.333333',a.CORE_pct_SPLT_NO))||'|'||
    ((a.PROD_LST_AMT)*decode(a.CORE_pct_SPLT_NO,'.3333','.333333',a.CORE_pct_SPLT_NO))||'|'||
    ((a.PROD_LST_AMT-a.PROD_SLS_AMT)*decode(a.CORE_pct_SPLT_NO,'.3333','.333333',a.CORE_pct_SPLT_NO))||'|'||
    ((a.PROD_SLS_AMT-a.COACT_SCOST_AMT)*decode(a.CORE_pct_SPLT_NO,'.3333','.333333',a.CORE_pct_SPLT_NO))||'|'||
    ((a.PRC_BOOK_AMT*a.PROD_QTY)*decode(a.CORE_pct_SPLT_NO,'.3333','.333333',a.CORE_pct_SPLT_NO))||'|'||
    a.IDN_DESCN_NM_TXT
FROM  
( select /*+ NO_INDEX(T1 FACT_CNSMR_SLS_IDX6) */ 
    SUBSTR(dt.fisc_mo_cd,3,4)||SUBSTR(dt.fisc_mo_cd,8,2) fisc_yr_mo, 
    T9.CORE_SRC_REG_ID,
    T9.CORE_REG_NM,
    T9.CORE_SRC_DIV_ID,
    T9.CORE_DIV_NM,
    T7.INDV_CUST_NM,
    T7.INDV_CUST_NO,
    T5.BG_ID_NO,
    T5.BG_NM,
    T3.DIV_NM,
    T3.DIV_CD,
    T3.MJR_GRP_NM,
    T3.MJR_GRP_CD,
    T3.MNR_GRP_NM,
    T3.MNR_GRP_CD,
    T3.BASE_PROD_CD,
    T1.CONTR_PRD_TIER_NO,
    T3.COACT_SCOST_AMT,
    T1.PROD_QTY,
    T9.CORE_PCT_SPLT_NO,
    T1.PROD_SLS_AMT,
    T1.PROD_LST_AMT,
    T4.PRC_BOOK_AMT,
    T9.IDN_DESCN_NM_TXT
  from
      FACT_CNSMR_SLS T1 INNER JOIN  DIM_CUST_MV T7 ON T1.cust_be_id = T7.object_id
      INNER JOIN DIM_PROD T3 ON T1.fg_be_id = T3.be_id
      INNER JOIN DIM_PROD_PRC_BOOK_MV T4 ON T3.base_prod_oid = T4.base_prod_oid
      INNER JOIN DIM_CUST_ALGN_MV T9 ON T1.cust_be_id = T9.cust_be_id
      INNER JOIN DIM_BUYG_GRP T5 ON T1.BG_ID_NO_BE_ID = T5.BE_ID
      INNER JOIN DIM_TM_MV DT ON T1.COMP_dt_be_id= dt.be_id
   WHERE
     dt.fy_cd      >= 'FY2009'
     AND T1.rptg_yr_cd  in ('2009','2010')
     AND trunc(sysdate-to_char(sysdate+1,'D')) BETWEEN T5.START_DATE AND T5.end_date
     AND trunc(sysdate-to_char(sysdate+1,'D')) BETWEEN T3.START_DATE AND T3.end_date
     AND T4.PRC_BOOK_TYP_CD = 'D'
     AND to_date(T1.RPTG_YR_CD||T1.RPTG_YR_MO||'15','YYYYMMDD') between
               T4.PROD_PRC_BOOK_FISC_STRT_DT and T4.PROD_PRC_BOOK_FISC_END_DT
     AND T9.CURRENT_FLG = 'Y'
     AND T7.CURRENT_FLG = 'Y'
     AND T9.algn_strc_cd = 'AS11'
     AND T7.INDV_CUST_STT_CD <> 'ZZ'
) a INNER JOIN
(
select distinct
        T2.CONTR_NO,
        T6.CONTR_TIER_TXT,
        T2.CONTR_STRNG_NM,
        T6.CONTR_NO||T6.CONTR_PRD_NO||T6.CONTR_TIER_NO CONTR_PRD_TIER_NO
from contr@eescip20 T2, contr_prd_tier@eescip20 T6
where T2.CONTR_NO = T6.CONTR_NO
union 
select '0000000' CONTR_NO,
       'NOT CONTRACTED' CONTR_TIER_TXT,
       'NO CONTRACT' CONTR_STRNG_NM,
       '00000000000' CONTR_PRD_TIER_NO
from dual
) b  ON a.CONTR_PRD_TIER_NO = b.CONTR_PRD_TIER_NO;



SPOOL OFF

exit;


Please help to improve the query. The database version is Oracle 9.2.08.

Explain plan is

Plan
SELECT STATEMENT CHOOSE Cost: 2,695 Bytes: 326,890 Cardinality: 337 
 	31 HASH JOIN PARALLEL_TO_SERIAL :Q195061005 Cost: 2,695 Bytes: 326,890 Cardinality: 337 
 	 	25 NESTED LOOPS PARALLEL_TO_PARALLEL :Q195061004 Cost: 2,376 Bytes: 256,734 Cardinality: 306 
 	 	 	22 NESTED LOOPS PARALLEL_COMBINED_WITH_PARENT :Q195061004 Cost: 2,362 Bytes: 173,736 Cardinality: 228 
 	 	 	 	19 NESTED LOOPS PARALLEL_COMBINED_WITH_PARENT :Q195061004 Cost: 2,351 Bytes: 119,756 Cardinality: 182 
 	 	 	 	 	16 HASH JOIN PARALLEL_COMBINED_WITH_PARENT :Q195061004 Cost: 2,348 Bytes: 106,834 Cardinality: 182 
 	 	 	 	 	 	3 TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID PARALLEL_FROM_SERIAL WHSUSR.DIM_PROD_PRC_BOOK_MV :Q195061000 Cost: 56 Bytes: 3,030,880 Cardinality: 94,715 
 	 	 	 	 	 	 	2 BITMAP CONVERSION TO ROWIDS 
 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	1 BITMAP INDEX SINGLE VALUE WHSUSR.XN2_DIM_PROD_PRC_BOOK_MV 
 	 	 	 	 	 	15 HASH JOIN PARALLEL_COMBINED_WITH_PARENT :Q195061004 Cost: 2,292 Bytes: 4,185,810 Cardinality: 7,542 
 	 	 	 	 	 	 	6 TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID PARALLEL_FROM_SERIAL WHSUSR.DIM_PROD :Q195061001 Cost: 269 Bytes: 43,086 Cardinality: 129 
 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	5 BITMAP CONVERSION TO ROWIDS 
 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	4 BITMAP INDEX FULL SCAN WHSUSR.XN3_DIM_PROD 
 	 	 	 	 	 	 	14 HASH JOIN PARALLEL_COMBINED_WITH_PARENT :Q195061004 Cost: 2,023 Bytes: 48,538,451 Cardinality: 219,631 
 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	7 TABLE ACCESS FULL PARALLEL_FROM_SERIAL WHSUSR.DIM_BUYG_GRP :Q195061002 Cost: 16 Bytes: 1,166 Cardinality: 11 
 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	13 INLIST ITERATOR PARALLEL_COMBINED_WITH_PARENT :Q195061004
 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	12 PARTITION RANGE ITERATOR PARALLEL_COMBINED_WITH_PARENT :Q195061004 Partition #: 16 Partitions accessed #KEY(INLIST)
 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	11 PARTITION LIST ALL PARALLEL_COMBINED_WITH_PARENT :Q195061004 Partition #: 17 Partitions accessed #1 - #12
 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	10 TABLE ACCESS BY LOCAL INDEX ROWID PARALLEL_COMBINED_WITH_PARENT TRANSDATA.FACT_CNSMR_SLS :Q195061004 Cost: 2,006 Bytes: 826,146,890 Cardinality: 7,183,886 Partition #: 17 Partitions accessed #KEY(INLIST)
 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	9 BITMAP CONVERSION TO ROWIDS PARALLEL_COMBINED_WITH_PARENT :Q195061004
 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	8 BITMAP INDEX SINGLE VALUE PARALLEL_COMBINED_WITH_PARENT TRANSDATA.FACT_CNSMR_SLS_BIDX8 :Q195061004 Partition #: 17 Partitions accessed #KEY(INLIST)
 	 	 	 	 	18 TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID PARALLEL_COMBINED_WITH_PARENT WHSUSR.DIM_TM_MV :Q195061004 Cost: 1 Bytes: 71 Cardinality: 1 
 	 	 	 	 	 	17 INDEX RANGE SCAN NON-UNIQUE PARALLEL_COMBINED_WITH_PARENT WHSUSR.XN1_DIM_TM_MV :Q195061004 Cost: 1 Cardinality: 1 
 	 	 	 	21 TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID PARALLEL_COMBINED_WITH_PARENT WHSUSR.DIM_CUST_ALGN_MV :Q195061004 Cost: 1 Bytes: 104 Cardinality: 1 
 	 	 	 	 	20 INDEX RANGE SCAN NON-UNIQUE PARALLEL_COMBINED_WITH_PARENT WHSUSR.XN0_DIM_CUST_ALGN_MV :Q195061004 Cost: 2 Cardinality: 16 
 	 	 	24 TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID PARALLEL_COMBINED_WITH_PARENT WHSUSR.DIM_CUST_MV :Q195061004 Cost: 1 Bytes: 77 Cardinality: 1 
 	 	 	 	23 INDEX RANGE SCAN NON-UNIQUE PARALLEL_COMBINED_WITH_PARENT WHSUSR.XN1_DIM_CUST_MV :Q195061004 Cost: 2 Cardinality: 2 
 	 	30 VIEW PARALLEL_FROM_SERIAL WHS_CUBES. :Q195061003 Cost: 319 Bytes: 855,561 Cardinality: 6,531 
 	 	 	29 SORT UNIQUE Cost: 319 Bytes: 881,550 Cardinality: 6,531 
 	 	 	 	28 UNION-ALL 
 	 	 	 	 	26 REMOTE SERIAL_FROM_REMOTE EESCIP20.WORLD Cost: 136 Bytes: 1,509,486 Cardinality: 22,871 
 	 	 	 	 	27 TABLE ACCESS FULL SYS.DUAL Cost: 2 Cardinality: 1 




[Updated on: Mon, 04 October 2010 04:55]

Report message to a moderator

Re: Query running way too slow [message #477757 is a reply to message #477733] Mon, 04 October 2010 04:55 Go to previous messageGo to next message
cookiemonster
Messages: 13958
Registered: September 2008
Location: Rainy Manchester
Senior Member
If you want us to look at it I suggest you post the query and explain plan here in code tags as you have in your other thread.
Re: Query running way too slow [message #477759 is a reply to message #477757] Mon, 04 October 2010 04:58 Go to previous messageGo to next message
indrajit2002
Messages: 53
Registered: November 2007
Location: INDIA
Member
Hi,
I have modified the post above. Please check.
Re: Query running way too slow [message #477762 is a reply to message #477759] Mon, 04 October 2010 05:05 Go to previous messageGo to next message
cookiemonster
Messages: 13958
Registered: September 2008
Location: Rainy Manchester
Senior Member
Get the explain plan in the same format as your other post - that's way too hard to read.
Also is that for the first query or the second?
Please supply explain plans for both queries.
Re: Query running way too slow [message #477767 is a reply to message #477762] Mon, 04 October 2010 05:21 Go to previous messageGo to next message
indrajit2002
Messages: 53
Registered: November 2007
Location: INDIA
Member
The explain plan is as follows,

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id  | Operation                                   |  Name                     | Rows  | Bytes | Cost  | Pstart| Pstop |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT                            |                           |   337 |   319K|  2699 |       |       |
|*  1 |  HASH JOIN                                  |                           |   337 |   319K|  2699 |       |       |
|   2 |   NESTED LOOPS                              |                           |   306 |   250K|  2380 |       |       |
|   3 |    NESTED LOOPS                             |                           |   228 |   169K|  2366 |       |       |
|   4 |     NESTED LOOPS                            |                           |   182 |   116K|  2355 |       |       |
|*  5 |      HASH JOIN                              |                           |   182 |   104K|  2352 |       |       |
|   6 |       TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID           | DIM_PROD_PRC_BOOK_MV      | 94715 |  2959K|    56 |       |       |
|   7 |        BITMAP CONVERSION TO ROWIDS          |                           |       |       |       |       |       |
|*  8 |         BITMAP INDEX SINGLE VALUE           | XN2_DIM_PROD_PRC_BOOK_MV  |       |       |       |       |       |
|*  9 |       HASH JOIN                             |                           |  7546 |  4089K|  2296 |       |       |
|* 10 |        TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID          | DIM_PROD                  |   129 | 43086 |   273 |       |       |
|  11 |         BITMAP CONVERSION TO ROWIDS         |                           |       |       |       |       |       |
|  12 |          BITMAP INDEX FULL SCAN             | XN3_DIM_PROD              |       |       |       |       |       |
|* 13 |        HASH JOIN                            |                           |   219K|    46M|  2023 |       |       |
|* 14 |         TABLE ACCESS FULL                   | DIM_BUYG_GRP              |    11 |  1166 |    16 |       |       |
|  15 |         INLIST ITERATOR                     |                           |       |       |       |       |       |
|  16 |          PARTITION RANGE ITERATOR           |                           |       |       |       |KEY(I) |KEY(I) |
|  17 |           PARTITION LIST ALL                |                           |       |       |       |     1 |    12 |
|  18 |            TABLE ACCESS BY LOCAL INDEX ROWID| FACT_CNSMR_SLS            |  7183K|   787M|  2006 |KEY(I) |KEY(
|  19 |             BITMAP CONVERSION TO ROWIDS     |                           |       |       |       |       |       |
|* 20 |              BITMAP INDEX SINGLE VALUE      | FACT_CNSMR_SLS_BIDX8      |       |       |       |KEY(I) |KEY(I) |
|* 21 |      TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID            | DIM_TM_MV                 |     1 |    71 |     1 |       |       |
|* 22 |       INDEX RANGE SCAN                      | XN1_DIM_TM_MV             |     1 |       |     1 |       |       |
|* 23 |     TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID             | DIM_CUST_ALGN_MV          |     1 |   104 |     1 |       |       |
|* 24 |      INDEX RANGE SCAN                       | XN0_DIM_CUST_ALGN_MV      |    16 |       |     2 |       |       |
|* 25 |    TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID              | DIM_CUST_MV               |     1 |    77 |     1 |       |       |
|* 26 |     INDEX RANGE SCAN                        | XN1_DIM_CUST_MV           |     2 |       |     2 |       |       |
|  27 |   VIEW                                      |                           |  6531 |   835K|   319 |       |       |
|  28 |    SORT UNIQUE                              |                           |  6531 |   860K|   319 |       |       |
|  29 |     UNION-ALL                               |                           |       |       |       |       |       |
|  30 |      REMOTE                                 |                           | 22871 |  1474K|   136 |       |       |
|  31 |      TABLE ACCESS FULL                      | DUAL                      |     1 |       |     2 |       |       |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: Query running way too slow [message #477798 is a reply to message #477767] Mon, 04 October 2010 09:42 Go to previous messageGo to next message
cookiemonster
Messages: 13958
Registered: September 2008
Location: Rainy Manchester
Senior Member
My last post had three points/questions - you've addressed one of them.
Re: Query running way too slow [message #477852 is a reply to message #477798] Mon, 04 October 2010 21:51 Go to previous message
rleishman
Messages: 3728
Registered: October 2005
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Senior Member
So, the change from the good-performing query to bad-performing involved joining in an inline-view that involves remote tables.

Generally speaking, SQLs combining local and remote tables are notoriously difficult to tune. Only the most trivial of cases ever work out well.

You really need to make those remote tables local ones, and then index them appropriately. Materialized Views are a good way to replicate the contents of tables across databases, but be aware that -depending on how you set it up - the local copy (the Materialized View) may not necessarily always be up to date.

Talk to your DBA about replication.

Ross Leishman
Previous Topic: Tuning Buffer cache and Buffer Busy Waits.
Next Topic: Query Problem
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Fri Nov 22 07:19:24 CST 2024