Indexing

Jonathan Lewis's picture

count(*) – again !

Because you can never have enough of a good thing.

Here’s a thought – The optimizer doesn’t treat all constants equally.  No explanations, just read the code – execution plans at the end:

Jonathan Lewis's picture

Quiz Night

I have a table with several indexes on it, and I have two versions of a query that I might run against that table. Examine them carefully, then come up with some plausible reason why it’s possible (with no intervening DDL, DML, stats collection, parameter fiddling etc., etc., etc.) for the second form of the query to be inherently more efficient than the first.

Jonathan Lewis's picture

Quiz night

Here’s a script to create a table, with index, and collect stats on it. Once I’ve collected stats I’ve checked the execution plan to discover that a hint has been ignored (for a well-known reason):

Jonathan Lewis's picture

Delete Costs

One of the quirky little anomalies of the optimizer is that it’s not allowed to select rows from a table after doing an index fast full scan (index_ffs) even if it is obviously the most efficient (or, perhaps, least inefficient) strategy. For example:

Jonathan Lewis's picture

Delete Costs

One of the quirky little anomalies of the optimizer is that it’s not allowed to select rows from a table after doing an index fast full scan (index_ffs) even if it is obviously the most efficient (or, perhaps, least inefficient) strategy. For example:

Jonathan Lewis's picture

Cluster Nulls

Yesterday’s posting was a reminder that bitmap indexes, unlike B-tree indexes in Oracle,  do store entries where every column in the index is null. The same is true for cluster indexes – which are implemented as basic B-tree indexes. Here’s a test case I wrote to demonstrate the point.

Jonathan Lewis's picture

Cluster Nulls

Yesterday’s posting was a reminder that bitmap indexes, unlike B-tree indexes in Oracle,  do store entries where every column in the index is null. The same is true for cluster indexes – which are implemented as basic B-tree indexes. Here’s a test case I wrote to demonstrate the point.

Jonathan Lewis's picture

Bitmap Nulls

It’s fairly well known that in Oracle B-tree indexes on heap tables don’t hold entries where all the indexed columns are all null, but that bitmap indexes will hold such entries and execution plans can for predicates like “column is null” can use bitmap indexes. Here’s a little test case to demonstrate the point (I ran this last on 12.1.0.1):

Jonathan Lewis's picture

Bitmap Nulls

It’s fairly well known that in Oracle B-tree indexes on heap tables don’t hold entries where all the indexed columns are all null, but that bitmap indexes will hold such entries and execution plans can for predicates like “column is null” can use bitmap indexes. Here’s a little test case to demonstrate the point (I ran this last on 12.1.0.1):

Jonathan Lewis's picture

Quiz Night

Okay – so it’s not night time in my home time-zone, but I’m in Singapore at the moment so it’s night time.

A very simple little quiz – so I’ve disabled comments for the moment and will re-enable them tomorrow morning to allow more people to have a chance to see the question without the solution.

Explain the anomaly displayed in the following “cut-n-paste” from a session running SQL*Plus on 11.2.0.4:

SQL> create unique index t1_i1 on t1(v1 desc);
create unique index t1_i1 on t1(v1 desc)
                                *
ERROR at line 1:
ORA-01452: cannot CREATE UNIQUE INDEX; duplicate keys found

SQL> create unique index t1_i1 on t1(v1);

Index created.

Answer

Well it didn’t take long for an answer and several bits of related infomration to show up – as Martin pointed out, all I have to do is insert NULL into the table twice.

To prevent automated spam submissions leave this field empty.
Syndicate content