We are planning to migrate our DB to Oracle.We need to manually check each of the embedded SQL is working in Oracle as few may follow different SQL rules.Now my need is very simple.
I need to browse through a file which may contain queries like this.
String sql = "select * from test where name="+test+"and age="+age;
There are nearly 1000 files and each file has different kind of queries like this where I have to pluck the query alone which I have done through an unix script.But I need to convert these Java based queries to Oracle compatible queries.
ie.
select * from test where name="name" and age="age"
Basically I need to check the syntax of the queries by this.I have seen something like this in TOAD but I have more than 1000 files and can't manually change each one.Is there a way?
I will explain more i the question is not clear
For performance and security reasons you should use PreparedStatement.bind(...) rather than string concatenation to build your SQL strings.
I don't know of a way to tackle this problem other than fixing the code that needs to be fixed. If you can find common patterns then you can automate some of the editing using find/replace or sed or some other tool, as long as you diff the result before checking it in.
If there are thousands of files I guess that there is a reasonable sized team that built the code this way. It seems fair to share the workload out amongst the people that built the system, rather than dump it all on one person. Otherwise you will end up as the "SQL fixing guy" and nobody else on the team will have any incentive to write SQL code in a more portable way.
Does your current application execute SQL through a common class? Could you add some logging to print out the raw SQL in this common class? From that output you could write a small script to run each statement against Oracle.
Related
Where's the best place to store the version of a table in Oracle? Is it possible to store the version in the table itself, e. g. similar to the comment assigned to a table?
I don't think you can store that information in Oracle, except maybe in a comment on the table, but that would be error prone.
But personally I think you shouldn't want to keep track of versions of tables. After all, to get from a version 1 to a version 2, you may need to modify data as well, or other objects like triggers and procedures that use to new version of the table.
So in a way, it's better to version the entire database, so you can 'combine' multiple changes in one atomic version number.
There are different approaches to this, and different tools that can help you with that. I think Oracle even has some built-in feature, but with Oracle, that means that you will be charged gold bars if you use it, so I won't get into that, and just describe the two that I have tried:
Been there, done that: saving schema structure in Git
At some point we wanted to save our database changes in GitHub, where our other source is too.
We've been using Red Gate Source Control for Oracle (and Schema Compare, a similar tool), and have been looking into other similar tools as well. These tools use version control like Git to keep the latest structure of the database, and it can help you get your changes from your development database to scripts folder or VCS, and it can generate migration scripts for you.
Personally I'm not a big fan, because those tools and scripts focus only on the structure of the database (like you would with versioning individual tables). You'd still need to know how to get from version 1 to version 2, and sometimes only adding a column isn't enough; you need to migrate your data too. This isn't covered properly by tools like this.
In addition, I thought they were overall quite expensive for the work that they do, they don't work as easy as promised on the box, and you'd need different tools for different databases.
Working with migrations
A better solution would be to have migration script. You just make a script to get your database from version 1 to version 2, and another script to get it from version 2 to version 3. These migrations can be about table structure, object modifications, or even just data, it doesn't matter. All you need to do is remember which script was executed last, and execute all versions after that.
Executing migrations can be done by hand, or you can simply script it. But there are tools for this as well. One of them is Flyway, a free tool (paid pro support should you need it) that does exactly this. You can feed it SQL scripts from a folder, which are sorted and executed in order. Each script is a 'version'. Meta data about the process is stored in a separate table in your database. The whole process is described in more detail on Flyway's website.
The advantage of this tool is that it's really simple and flexible, because you just write the migration scripts yourself. All the tool does is execute them and keep track of it. And it can do it for all kinds of databases, so you can introduce the same flow for each database you have.
One way is to define a comment on the table:
comment on table your_table is 'some comment';
Then you can read that meta information using all_tab_comments table.
See
How to get table comments via SQL in Oracle?
For further reading, see:
https://docs.oracle.com/cd/B19306_01/server.102/b14200/statements_4009.htm
I have an Oracle bind query that is extremely slow (about 2 minutes) when it executes in my C# program but runs very quickly in SQL Developer. It has two parameters that hit the tables index:
select t.Field1, t.Field2
from theTable t
where t.key1=:key1
and t.key2=:key2
Also, if I remove the bind variables and create dynamic sql, it runs just like it does in SQL Developer.
Any suggestion?
BTW, I'm using ODP.
If you are replacing the bind variables with static varibles in sql developer, then you're not really running the same test. Make sure you use the bind varibles, and if it's also slow you're just getting bit by a bad cached execution plan. Updating the stats on that table should resolve it.
However if you are actually using bind variables in sql developers then keep reading. The TLDR version is that parameters that ODP.net run under sometimes cause a slightly more pessimistic approach. Start with updating the stats, but have your dba capture the execution plan under both scenarios and compare to confirm.
I'm reposting my answer from here: https://stackoverflow.com/a/14712992/852208
I considered flagging yours as a duplicate but your title is a little more concise since it identifies the query does run fast in sql developer. I'll welcome advice on handling in another manner.
Adding the following to your config will send odp.net tracing info to a log file:
This will probably only be helpful if you can find a large gap in time. Chances are rows are actually coming in, just at a slower pace.
Try adding "enlist=false" to your connection string. I don't consider this a solution since it effecitively disables distributed transactions but it should help you isolate the issue. You can get a little bit more information from an oracle forumns post:
From an ODP perspective, all we can really point out is that the
behavior occurs when OCI_ATR_EXTERNAL_NAME and OCI_ATR_INTERNAL_NAME
are set on the underlying OCI connection (which is what happens when
distrib tx support is enabled).
I'd guess what you're not seeing is that the execution plan is actually different (meaning the actual performance hit is actually occuring on the server) between the odp.net call and the sql developer call. Have your dba trace the connection and obtain execution plans from both the odp.net call and the call straight from SQL Developer (or with the enlist=false parameter).
If you confirm different execution plans or if you want to take a preemptive shot in the dark, update the statistics on the related tables. In my case this corrected the issue, indicating that execution plan generation doesn't really follow different rules for the different types of connections but that the cost analysis is just slighly more pesimistic when a distributed transaction might be involved. Query hints to force an execution plan are also an option but only as a last resort.
Finally, it could be a network issue. If your odp.net install is using a fresh oracle home (which I would expect unless you did some post-install configuring) then the tnsnames.ora could be different. Host names in tnsnams might not be fully qualified, creating more delays resolving the server. I'd only expect the first attempt (and not subsequent attempts) to be slow in this case so I don't think it's the issue but I thought it should be mentioned.
Are the parameters bound to the correct data type in C#? Are the columns key1 and key2 numbers, but the parameters :key1 and :key2 are strings? If so, the query may return the correct results but will require implicit conversion. That implicit conversion is like using a function to_char(key1), which prevents an index from being used.
Please also check what is the number of rows returned by the query. If the number is big then possibly C# is fetching all rows and the other tool first pocket only. Fetching all rows may require many more disk reads in that case, which is slower. To check this try to run in SQL Developer:
SELECT COUNT(*) FROM (
select t.Field1, t.Field2
from theTable t
where t.key1=:key1
and t.key2=:key2
)
The above query should fetch the maximum number of database blocks.
Nice tool in such cases is tkprof utility which shows SQL execution plan which may be different in cases above (however it should not be).
It is also possible that you have accidentally connected to different databases. In such cases it is nice to compare results of queries.
Since you are raising "Bind is slow" I assume you have checked the SQL without binds and it was fast. In 99% using binds makes things better. Please check if query with constants will run fast. If yes than problem may be implicit conversion of key1 or key2 column (ex. t.key1 is a number and :key1 is a string).
We are planning a new system for a client in ORACLE 11g. I've been mostly in the Sql Server world for several years, and am not really current on the latest ORACLE updates.
One particular feature I'm wondering if ORACLE has added in by this point is some sort of logical "container" for database objects, akin to Sql Server's SCHEMA.
Trying to use ORACLE's schemas like Sql Server winds up being a disaster for code comparisons when trying to push from dev > test > live.
Packages are sort of similar, except that you can't put tables into a package (so they really only work for logical code grouping).
The only other option I am aware of is the archaic practice of having to prefix object names with a "schema" prefix, i.e. RPT_REPORTS, RPT_PARAMETERS, RPT_LOGS, RPT_USERS, RPT_RUN_REPORT(), with the prefix RPT_ denoting that these are all the objects dealing with our reporting engine say. Writing a system like this feels like we never left the 8.3 file-naming age.
Is there by this point in time any cleaner, more direct way of logically grouping related objects together in ORACLE?
Oracle's logical container for database objects IS the schema. I don't know how much "cleaner" and "more direct" you can get! You are going to have to do a paradigm shift here. Don't try to think in SQL Server terms, and force a solution that looks like SQL Server on Oracle. Get familiar with what Oracle does and approach your problems from that perspective. There should be no problem pushing from dev to test to production in Oracle if you know what you're doing.
It seems you have a bit of a chip on your shoulder about Oracle when you use terms like "archaic practice". I would suggest you make friends with Oracle's very rich and powerful feature set by doing some reading, since you're apparently already committed to Oracle for this project. In particular, pick up a copy of "Effective Oracle By Design" by Tom Kyte. Once you've read that, have a look at "Expert Oracle Database Architecture" by the same author for a more in-depth look at how Oracle works. You owe it to your customer to know how to use the tool you've been handed. Who knows? You might even start to like it. Think of it as another tool in your toolchest. You're not married to SQL Server and you're not being unfaithful by using Oracle ;-)
EDIT:
In response to questions by OP:
I'm not sure why that is a logistical problem. They can be thought of as separate databases, but physically they are not. And no, you do not need a separate data file for each schema. A single datafile is often used for all schemas.
If you want a "nice, self-contained database" ala SQL Server, just create one schema to store all your objects. End of problem. You can create other users/schemas, just don't give them the ability to create objects.
There are tools to compare objects and data, as in the PL/SQL Developer compare. Typically in Oracle you want to compare schemas, not entire databases. I'm not sure why it is you want to have multiple schemas each with their own objects anyway. What does is buy you to do that? Keep your objects (tables, triggers, code, views, etc.) in one schema.
I have created sql tuning task for some query and executed it.After generating report,It recommends me to run the following command:
execute dbms_sqltune.accept_sql_profile(task_name => 'tuning_task_name',
replace => TRUE);
But! Of course I want to know what does this profile do?! and after searching this question on the internet I found the following query:
select
rat.attr1
from
sys.WRI$_ADV_TASKS tsk,
sys.WRI$_ADV_RATIONALE rat
where
tsk.name = 'tuning_task_name'
and rat.task_id = tsk.id
And the result of this query is the following:
I don't understand what does it do :( And also I want to convert this profile hints into the more readable (/+ hint/) sql hints?
Yes, you saw those outline hints.
They will be forced to be used when oracle optimizer parsing this SQL. Hence, the generated execution plan is affected by those hints.
If you want to use similar hints in you SQL, you just need simply copy them into you SQL where follows SELECT, commented by /+/. Be aware the Query Block names, they will be changed in different SQL.
Here is a full list of Oracle SQL hints for your reference.
http://www.hellodba.com/reader.php?ID=208&lang=EN
http://www.hellodba.com/reader.php?ID=220&lang=EN
Hope this helps
Based on page 24 of this PDF it looks like these hints are mostly telling the optimizer to adjust the cardinality estimates for different objects. WHY the profiler is doing this I'm not sure; maybe the statistics are bad or maybe it's making fake statistics to force a better plan? But perhaps a better way to understand the profile is to compare the explain plan before and after.
I want to load data into text file that is generated after executing "views" in Oracle?How can I achieve this in oracle using UNIX.for example-
I want the same in Oracle on unix box.Please help me out as it alredy cosume lots of time.
your early response is highly appreciated!!
As Thomas asked, we need to know what you are doing with the "flat file". For example, if you're loading it into spreadsheet or doing some other processing that expects a defined format, then you need to use SQL*Plus and spool to a file. If you're looking to save a table (data + table definition) for moving it to another Oracle database then EXP/IMP is the tool to use.
We generally describe the data retrieval process as "selecting" from a table/view, not "executing" a table/view.
If you have access to directories on the database server, and authority to create "Directory" objects in Oracle, then you have lots of options.
For example, you can use the UTL_FILE package (part of the PL/SQL built-ins) to read or write files at the operating system level.
Or use the "external table" functionality to define objects that look like single tables to Oracle but are actually flat files at the OS level. Well documented in the Oracle docs.
Also, for one-time tasks, most of the tools for working SQL and PL/SQL provide facilities for moving data to and from the database. In the Windows environment, Toad's good at that. So is Oracle's free SQLDeveloper, which runs on many platforms. You wouldn't want to use those for a process that runs every day, but they're fine for single moves. I've generally found these easier to use than SQLPlus spooling, but that's a primitive version of the same functionality.
As stated by others, we need to know a bit more about what you're trying to do.