Dear all experts.
I have IOT having 7 million records in oracle database, eventually iot use for fast access primary key but in my case, when i select primary key column it takes 5-4 seconds for select single column.
My query is:
Select Emp_Refno from Emp_master where Rownum =1 order
by Emp_Refno asc;
I have also used Sql Tunning Advisor for optimize it and also get index suggest ion from SQL Tunning Advisor and also applied it, But in explain plan not seen this index and it takes same time after it.
I'm curious if the following query has the same execution time:
select * from (select Emp_Refno from Emp_master order by Emp_Refno asc) where rownum = 1
This is how I usually write top-n queries for Oracle.
Related
All the Oracles out here,
I have an Oracle PL/SQL procedure but very small data that can run on the query. I suspect that when the data gets large, the query might start performing back. Are there ways in which I can check for performance and take corrective measure even before the data build up? If I wait for the data buildup, it might get too late.
Do you have any general & practical suggestions for me? Searching the internet did not get me anything convincing.
Better to build yourself some test data to get an idea of how things will perform. Its easy to get started, eg
create table MY_TEST as select * from all_objects;
gives you approx 50,000 rows typically. You can scale that easily with
create table MY_TEST as select a.* from all_objects a ,
( select 1 from dual connect by level <= 10);
Now you have 500,000 rows
create table MY_TEST as select a.* from all_objects a ,
( select 1 from dual connect by level <= 10000);
Now you have 500,000,000 rows!
If you want unique values per row, then add rownum eg
create table MY_TEST as select rownum r, a.* from all_objects a ,
( select 1 from dual connect by level <= 10000);
If you want (say) 100,000 distinct values in a column then TRUNC or MOD. You can also use DBMS_RANDOM to generate random numbers, strings etc.
Also check out Morten's test data generator
https://github.com/morten-egan/testdata_ninja
for some domain specific data, and also the Oracle sample schemas on github which can also be scaled using techniques above.
https://github.com/oracle/db-sample-schemas
I created a table in oracle like
CREATE TABLE suppliers AS (SELECT * FROM companies WHERE id > 1000);
I would like to know the complete select statement which was used to create this table.
I have already tried get_ddl but it is not giving the select statement. Can you please let me know how to get the select statement?
If you're lucky one of these statements will show the DDL used to generate the table:
select *
from gv$sql
where lower(sql_fulltext) like '%create table suppliers%';
select *
from dba_hist_sqltext
where lower(sql_text) like '%create table%';
I used the word lucky because GV$SQL will usually only have results for a few hours or days, until the data is purged from the shared pool. DBA_HIST_SQLTEXT will only help if you have AWR enabled, the statement was run in the last X days that AWR is configured to hold data (the default is 8), the statement was run after the last snapshot collection (by default it happens every hour), and the statement ran long enough for AWR to think it's worth saving.
And for each table Oracle does not always store the full SQL. For security reasons, DDL statements are often truncated in the data dictionary. Don't be surprised if the text suddenly cuts off after the first N characters.
And depending on how the SQL is called the case and space may be different. Use lower and lots of wildcards to increase the chance of finding the statement.
TRY THIS:
select distinct table_name
from
all_tab_columns where column_name in
(
select column_name from
all_tab_columns
where table_name ='SUPPLIERS'
)
you can find table which created from table
In my company's application there is a query in oracle using parallel execution (configured to 4 servers), it wasn't me who built it, but the developer put it that way for performance.
The query makes joins between views and tables and the weirdest thing is: sometimes it returns 11k results (incorrect), sometimes 27k results (correct).
After much research I found out that if I removed this parallel thing, it always returns the correct number: 27k. And if I increase the number of server to 6 or 7, it always returns the incorrect number: 11k.
The layout of the query is like this:
SELECT /*+ PARALLEL(NAME, 4) */ * FROM(
SELECT DISTINCT COLUMNS
FROM VIEW
JOIN TABLE1 ON (....)
JOIN TABLE2 ON (....)
JOIN TABLE3 ON (....)
ORDER BY 3
) NAME
Anyone has any idea why? I don't know much about this subject.
SELECT * FROM (
select *
from tableA
where ColumnA = 'randomText'
ORDER BY columnL ASC
) WHERE ROWNUM <= 25
on execution of this query, due to some Oracle optimization, the query takes about 14 minutes to execute . If I remove the where clause , the query executes in seconds. most of the columns of the table have indexes on them, including the ones mentioned above. I do not have much flexibility on the structure of the query as I use hibernate.
This query returns results instantly too, with the correct result:
SELECT *
FROM (
select *
from tableA,
dual
where ColumnA = 'randomText'
ORDER BY columnL ASC
) WHERE ROWNUM <= 25
is there something I can do, using hibernate?
UPDATE: I use EntityManager.createQuery(), and I use setMaxResults(25) and setFirstResult() too. the query above is what hibernate's query looks like, upon observation of logs
I don't get the explain plans exactly matched to your queries, but it seems oracle using a different index for the two queries.
Can you create an index containing columnA and columnL?
If you have an index only containing columnA, you MIGHT be able to drop that without a large effect on performance of other queries.
An alternative would be to add a hint to use the index used in the faster query. But this would require you to use native sql.
this means you are using hibernate/jpa? If so, I guess you are using the EntityManager.createNativeQuery() to create the query? Try removing your where-restriction and use the .setMaxResults(25) on the Query instead.
Anyways, why do you need the outer-select? Wouldn't
select *
from tableA
where ColumnA = 'randomText'
AND ROWNUM <= 25
ORDER BY columnL ASC
produce the desired results?
well this problem is general in sql server ce
i have indexes on all the the fields.
also the same query but with ID IN ( list of int ids) is pretty fast.
i tried to change the query to OUTER Join but this just make it worse.
so any hints on why this happen and how to fix this problem?
That's because the index is not really helpful for that kind of query, so the database has to do a full table scan. If the query is (for some reason) slower than a simple "SELECT * FROM TABLE", do that instead and filter the unwanted IDs in the program.
EDIT: by your comment, I recognize you use a subquery instead of a list. Because of that, there are three possible ways to do the same (hopefully one of them is faster):
Original statement:
select * from mytable where id not in (select id from othertable);
Alternative 1:
select * from mytable where not exists
(select 1 from othertable where mytable.id=othertable.id);
Alternative 2:
select * from mytable
minus
select mytable.* from mytable in join othertable on mytable.id=othertable.id;
Alternative 3: (ugly and hard to understand, but if everything else fails...)
select * from mytable
left outer join othertable on (mytable.id=othertable.id)
where othertable.id is null;
This is not a problem in SQL Server CE, but overall database.
The OPERATION IN is sargable and NOT IN is nonsargable.
What this mean ?
Search ARGument Able, thies mean that DBMS engine can take advantage of using index, for Non Search ARGument Ablee the index can't be used.
The solution might be using filter statement to remove those IDs
More in SQL Performance Tuning by Peter Gulutzan.
ammoQ is right, index does not help much with your query. Depending on distribution of values in your ID column you could optimise the query by specifying which IDs to select rather than not to select. If you end up requesting say more than ~25% of the table index will not be used anyway though because for nonclustered indexed (which is the only type of indexes which SQL CE supports if memory serves) it would be cheaper to scan the table. Otherwise (if the query is actually selective) you could re-write query with ID ranges to select ('union all' may work better than 'or' to combine ranges if SQL CE supports 'union all', not sure)