Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid |
![]() |
![]() |
Home -> Community -> Mailing Lists -> Oracle-L -> SQL Query tuning help
I am trying to tune a SQL query on Oracle 8.1.6. I have tried several
optimizations, but
so far have made no improvements. I would appreciate any suggestions.
SELECT am.lid, am.name
FROM am, so, sa
WHERE so.lid = am.lid
AND so.key_ = sa.so_key AND am.active = 1 AND so.code = 11 AND sa.ret = 'SB'
Tables:
am - 250,000 rows, 220,000 rows have active = 1, the others are 0. so - 1.3 million rows, lid has 250,000 distinct values, key_ is unique,
code has 12 values, evenly distributed. sa - 1.3 million rows, ret has 281 values, fairly evenly distributed. so_key is pretty unique.
Now, you'll probably say there is essentially a 1-1 relationship between so and sa. You are right, but the developer insists this flexibility is essential.
The query executes in 16 seconds and returns 185 rows. This is felt to be too slow for an online lookup screen.
explain plan results:
SELECT STATEMENT Cost = 2955 SORT ORDER BY HASH JOIN HASH JOIN TABLE ACCESS FULL SA TABLE ACCESS FULL SO TABLE ACCESS FULL AM
Here is what I've tried so far:
Using hints to force Oracle to use indexes.
Query Plan
HASH JOIN TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID SA INDEX FULL SCAN SO_KEY3 TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID SO INDEX RANGE SCAN PRG_CODE3 TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID AM INDEX UNIQUE SCAN LID6
Timing result 25 minutes
Next I tried creating new indexes that combine both the accessing column as well as the retrieved column, thinking that Oracle could get the result from the index block and not need to retrieve the data block.
create index test1 on am (lid, active); create index test2 on sa (so_key, code);
SELECT STATEMENT Cost = 2951
SORT AGGREGATE
HASH JOIN
HASH JOIN INDEX FULL SCAN TEST2 TABLE ACCESS FULL SO TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID AM INDEX RANGE SCAN TEST1
Hinting so Oracle will use the new indexes, for one table Oracle uses the index only and for the other table, Oracle hits both the index and table itself. Response time is slightly longer than the original query. At this point I'm fresh out of ideas, so any ideas would be appreciated. Thanks.
Dennis Williams
DBA
Received on Tue Sep 10 2002 - 13:12:39 CDT
![]() |
![]() |