Re: Correlated subquery performance in 8i & 9i

From: <Jared.Still_at_radisys.com>
Date: Thu, 05 Sep 2002 11:38:32 -0800
Message-ID: <F001.004C8F0C.20020905113832@fatcity.com>

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)" <prakash_bala_at_non.hp.com> Sent by: root_at_fatcity.com
09/05/2002 12:11 PM
Please respond to ORACLE-L

        To:     Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L <ORACLE-L_at_fatcity.com>
        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: prakash_bala_at_non.hp.com

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: ListGuru_at_fatcity.com (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: Jared.Still_at_radisys.com

Fat City Network Services    -- (858) 538-5051  FAX: (858) 538-5051
San Diego, California        -- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists
--------------------------------------------------------------------