Is your setting for db_file_multiblock_count too high? What's the optimizer
mode? Have you set any of the optimizer_index_???? parameters in the
initialization file? These parameters might be driving Oracle to prefer a
full table scan over a index scan.
My 1.2 cents (after NY Taxes).
Raj
Joe Raube
<jraube@yahoo To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
.com> cc:
Sent by: Subject: Re: Cost vs Rule
root@fatcity.
com
March 07,
2002 02:43 PM
Please
respond to
ORACLE-L
How much have you played with Oracle Hints???
-Joe
--- "Magaliff, Bill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I work in a dev shop - most of the sql is canned and pretty basic.
> We've
> been running CBO in all of our dev environments, but we have a few
> long txns
> that just take forever. At the request of some savvy developers, I
> turned
> on RBO, and it brought down execution times dramatically.
>
> I've been analyzing affected tables often (we do a lot of bulk
> load/unload
> for testing), and have played with partitioning and clustering,
> particularly
> on one table that's just a dog. CBO will always do a FTS where RBO
> uses the
> PK to retrieve data.
>
> Where to go next? I've been unable to alter the costs dramatically
> enough
> to make any real difference in execution time.
>
> thx
>
> --
--
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
--
Author:
INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fat City Network Services -- (858) 538-5051 FAX: (858) 538-5051
San Diego, California -- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists
--------------------------------------------------------------------
To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
(or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may
also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).
