> There are times when running a test harness
> through a single pl/sql is going to give you
> a spurious result because of extra pinning
> (of data blocks and library cache material)
> may confuse the issue.
That isn't a factor, as I never use the results
from the first run for that very reason.
Jared
| "Jonathan Lewis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 12/30/2003 03:29 AM
|
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc: Subject: Re: pl/sql open cursor question |
There are times when running a test harness
through a single pl/sql is going to give you
a spurious result because of extra pinning
(of data blocks and library cache material)
may confuse the issue.
Technically, if the implicit code and the explicit
code were written to do exactly the same thing,
then the implicit code should be faster because
of a couple of under-cover optimisations. (This
has been true for several years, I believe).
Currently (9.2.0.X-ish) there is a bug that I
recently found on metalink which says something
about the FETCHes from an implicit cursor using
more CPU than the FETCHes from an explicit
cursor.
Bottom line - test it in the environment where you
are using it, and on the version you are running in
production. In almost all cases, the difference will
probably be imperceptible, anyway.
Regards
Jonathan Lewis
http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk
The educated person is not the person
who can answer the questions, but the
person who can question the answers -- T. Schick Jr
One-day tutorials:
http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/tutorial.html
Three-day seminar:
see http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/seminar.html
____UK___November
The Co-operative Oracle Users' FAQ
http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/faq/ind_faq.html
----- Original Message -----
To: "Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2003 10:49 AM
Jared,
Point taken. I should do some testing instead of publish an opinion. I
still do not like the constraction, but that's a matter of taste.
I have done some testing as well, because I think you were somehow
comparing apples and oranges: function a uses an implicit cursor, whereas
function b has an explicit cursor. So I ran a, b and b2 through Tom Kyte's
runstats harness, but found no significant differences:
--
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
--
Author: Jonathan Lewis
INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fat City Network Services -- 858-538-5051 http://www.fatcity.com
San Diego, California -- Mailing list and web hosting services
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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).
