Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid |
![]() |
![]() |
Home -> Community -> Mailing Lists -> Oracle-L -> RE: full-scan vs index for "small" tables
One point of clarification: How fast a query execution plan runs has
nothing to do with which optimizer you're using. In other words, it's
not that the concept "never index a small table" was right during the
RBO years and became wrong during the CBO years. It was wrong during the
RBO years as well.
RBO is dramatically inferior to CBO in every case except for the one where the operational manager doesn't do a good job of making sure that the statistics are a reasonable representation of the production data.
Cary Millsap
Hotsos Enterprises, Ltd.
Nullius in verba
Hotsos Symposium 2007 / March 4-8 / Dallas
Visit www.hotsos.com for curriculum and schedule details...
From: oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org
[mailto:oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org] On Behalf Of Laimutis Nedzinskas
Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2006 4:47 AM
To: oracle-l_at_freelists.org
Subject: RE: full-scan vs index for "small" tables
>On Behalf Of Nigel Thomas
>To be fair, the sentence continues (my bold, from 10gR1):
>"...a full table scan might be cheaper than an index range scan"
>or by implication it might not. Or they could be the same. Or England
could win the World Cup. Or whatever. Looks like they've got all the
angles covered there then.
And surely I am lost. What are the best practices for SQL programmer in the modern post_Rule_Based_Optimizer Oracle then?
P.S. Just wandering: is there a hint to *disable* statistics at statement or session level? I mean, let CBO use *defaults* making it kind of rule based actually.
Thank you in advance,
Laimis N.
Fyrirvari/Disclaimer
http://www.landsbanki.is/disclaimer
<http://www.landsbanki.is/disclaimer>
-- http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-lReceived on Wed Jun 28 2006 - 08:44:21 CDT
![]() |
![]() |