Re: Sql*Loader direct slower than nodirect problem...

From: Giorgio Sorbara <mail_at_fake.org>
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 22:04:56 +0200
Message-ID: <cl0qbu$1fb$1@newsreader1.mclink.it>

Giorgio Sorbara wrote:

> Now I was wondering if is it really faster to go for a direct path load
> even if there is a function involved... does Oracle need to go through
> Sql for evaluting the function? even if this is the case i would expect
> at least the same performance I get with the no direct...

gotcha... metalink says that you can't use a sql function with direct path... hence nodirect or other solution.

/G Received on Mon Oct 18 2004 - 15:04:56 CDT

This message: [ Message body ]
Next message: Steven Garcia: "Re: AQ vs. PL/SQL for implementing a messaging queue"
Previous message: Hans Forbrich: "Re: Comparison of DB2 and Oracle?"
In reply to: Giorgio Sorbara: "Sql*Loader direct slower than nodirect problem..."
Next in thread: Joel Garry: "Re: Sql*Loader direct slower than nodirect problem..."

Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]

Original text of this message

HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US