On Wed, 9 Mar 2005 11:08 pm, Hugo Ferreira wrote:
> For example... I run the query, it takes 122seconds. Then I delete the
> target tables, vacuum the database, re-run it again: 9s. But if I run
> vacuum several times, and then run, it takes again 122seconds. If I
> stop this 122seconds query, say,
Hi,
Well, I think the problem is far more complex than just joins
reordering... I've restrucutred the query so that it won't use any
explicit joins.Instead it now has a series of 'in (select ...)' and
'not exists (select ...)'. This actually got faster... sometimes!!!
select 1, 1168, C.contx
Hugo Ferreira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> SELECT 514, 1168, C.contxt_id, C.contxt_elmt_ix, null, null,
> null, null, null, null, 1
> FROM CONTXT as P INNER JOIN CONTXT_ELMT as C on P.contxt_id = C.contxt_id
>INNER JOIN MRS_REPLICATION_OUT as S on S.ent_id=1029
>
I'm sorry for my unpolite query alignment. Here is the query in a more
human-readable format:
SELECT 514, 1168, C.contxt_id, C.contxt_elmt_ix, null, null,
null, null, null, null, 1
FROM CONTXT as P INNER JOIN CONTXT_ELMT as C on P.contxt_id = C.contxt_id
INNER JOIN MRS_REPLICATION_OUT
Hugo,
> insert into MRS_REPLICATION_OUT select 514, 1168, C.contxt_id,
> C.contxt_elmt_ix, CAST(null as NUMERIC(18)), CAST(null as
> NUMERIC(18)), CAST(null as NUMERIC(18)), CAST(null as NUMERIC(18)),
> CAST(null as NUMERIC(18)), null, 1 from c2iedm.CONTXT as P inner join
> c2iedm.CONTXT_ELMT
Hi there :-)
I'm really, really having trouble with this query... It is a part of,
hmmm... 200 similar querys that I dinyamically build and run in a
stored procedure. This one, for example, takes 27seconds to run. The
whole stored procedure executes in about 15minutes. This is too much
when compar
