I have a select like this
DATA lt_data TYPE SORTED TABLE OF T_TYPE1 WITH NON-UNIQUE KEY col1.
SELECT col1, col2 INTO CORRESPONDING FIELDS OF TABLE lt_data where...
My question is: will the sorting operation be performed on the DB or on the application server side? My DB is Hana DB (S/4 Hana).
The documentation states that a sorting process is executed after the result set is inserted into the table thus it takes place on the application server.
The results set is inserted into the internal table itab row-by-row; a sorting process is executed in the case of a sorted table.
Related
I know that ROWID is distinct for each row in different tables.But,I am seeing somewhere that two tables are being merged using rowid.So,I also tried to see it,but I am getting the blank output.
I have person table which looks as:
scrowid is the column which contains rowid as:
alter table ot.person
add scrowid VARCHAR2(200) PRIMARY KEY;
I populated this person table as:
insert into ot.person(id,name,age,scrowid)
select id,name, age,a.rowid from ot.per a;
After this I also created another table ot.temp_person by same steps.Both table has same table structure and datatypes.So, i wanted to see them using inner join and I tried them as:
select * from ot.person p inner join ot.temp_person tp ON p.scrowid=tp.scrowid
I got my output as empty table:
Is there is any possible way I can merge two tables using rowid? Or I have forgotten some steps?If there is any way to join these two tables using rowid then suggest me.
Define scrowid as datatype ROWID or UROWID then it may work.
However, in general the ROWID may change at any time unless you lock the record, so it would be a poor key to join your tables.
I think perhaps you misunderstood the merging of two tables via rowid, unless what you actually saw was a Union, Cross Join, or Full Outer Join. Any attempt to match rowid, requardless of you define it, doomed to fail. This results from it being an internal definition. Rowid in not just a data type it is an internal structure (That is an older version of description but Oracle doesn't link documentation versions.) Those fields are basically:
- The data object number of the object
- The data block in the datafile in which the row resides
- The position of the row in the data block (first row is 0)
- The datafile in which the row resides (first file is 1). The file
number is relative to the tablespace.
So while it's possible for different tables to have the same rowid, it would be exteremly unlikely. Thus making an inner join on them always return null.
Just want to know is this possible.
Say that if i have value 'X' and iam sure that this is referenced in some other tables as PK value but not sure about exactly which table is that, so i would like to know the list of those tables.
Pseudo query of above what i mentioned
SELECT TABLE_NAME FROM DBA_TABLES WHERE <<ATLEAST ONE OF THE TABLE ROW PK VALUE IS MATCHING EQUAL TO 'X'>>;
I am trying to load the tables into oracle in-memory database. I have enable the tables for INMEMORY by using sql+ command ALTER TABLE table_name INMEMORY. The table also contains data i.e. the table is populated. But when I try to use the command SELECT v.owner, v.segment_name name, v.populate_status status from v$im_segments v;, it shows no rows selected.
What can be the problem?
Have you considered this?
https://docs.oracle.com/database/121/CNCPT/memory.htm#GUID-DF723C06-62FE-4E5A-8BE0-0703695A7886
Population of the IM Column Store in Response to Queries
Setting the INMEMORY attribute on an object means that this object is a candidate for population in the IM column store, not that the database immediately populates the object in memory.
By default (INMEMORY PRIORITY is set to NONE), the database delays population of a table in the IM column store until the database considers it useful. When the INMEMORY attribute is set for an object, the database may choose not to materialize all columns when the database determines that the memory is better used elsewhere. Also, the IM column store may populate a subset of columns from a table.
You probably need to run a select against the date first
I'm using Oracle 11g. I have a query that joins local table with remote tables using db links. I want the driving table to be the remote table as I primarily filter using remote table to get a few rows. I then want to join them with local table.
The problem is the optimizer ignores ORDERED and INDEX hints and does a full table scan of the local table. I am using the right indexes and have generated statistics. I run the queries individually with each table they use the correct indexes, but with the join, the local table always does a full table scan and acts as the driving table.
SELECT /*+ INDEX_RS_ASC(l) */
*
FROM remote_table#mylink r
JOIN local_table l USING (cont_id)
WHERE r.PRIME_VENDOR_ID = '12345'
How can I determine if an Oracle index is clustered or unclustered?
I've done
select FIELD from TABLE where rownum <100
where FIELD is the field on which is built the index. I have ordered tuples, but the result is wrong because the index is unclustered.
By default all indexes in Oracle are unclustered. The only clustered indexes in Oracle are the Index-Organized tables (IOT) primary key indexes.
You can determine if a table is an IOT by looking at the IOT_TYPE column in the ALL_TABLES view (its primary key could be determined by querying the ALL_CONSTRAINTS and ALL_CONS_COLUMNS views).
Here are some reasons why your query might return ordered rows:
Your table is index-organized and FIELD is the leading part of its primary key.
Your table is heap-organized but the rows are by chance ordered by FIELD, this happens sometimes on an incrementing identity column.
Case 2 will return sorted rows only by chance. The order of the inserts is not guaranteed, furthermore Oracle is free to reuse old blocks if some happen to have available space in the future, disrupting the fragile ordering.
Case 1 will most of the time return ordered rows, however you shouldn't rely on it since the order of the rows returned depends upon the algorithm of the access path which may change in the future (or if you change DB parameter, especially parallelism).
In both case if you want ordered rows you should supply an ORDER BY clause:
SELECT field
FROM (SELECT field
FROM TABLE
ORDER BY field)
WHERE rownum <= 100;
There is no concept of a "clustered index" in Oracle as in SQL Server and Sybase. There is an Index-Organized Table, which is similar but not the same.
"Clustered" indices, as implemented in Sybase, MS SQL Server and possibly others, where rows are physically stored in the order of the indexed column(s) don't exist as such in Oracle. "Cluster" has a different meaning in Oracle, relating, I believe, to the way blocks and tables are organized.
Oracle does have "Index Organized Tables", which are physically equivalent, but they're used much less frequently because the query optimizer works differently.
The closest I can get to an answer to the identification question is to try something like this:
SELECT IOT_TYPE FROM user_tables
WHERE table_name = '<your table name>'
My 10g instance reports IOT or null accordingly.
Index Organized Tables have to be organized on the primary key. Where the primary key is a sequence generated value this is often useless or even counter-productive (because simultaneous inserts get into conflict for the same block).
Single table clusters can be used to group data with the same column value in the same database block(s). But they are not ordered.