generate barcode vb.net THE 10053 TRACE FILE in Java

Painting Code-39 in Java THE 10053 TRACE FILE

CHAPTER 14 THE 10053 TRACE FILE
Generating Code-39 In Java
Using Barcode encoder for Java Control to generate, create USS Code 39 image in Java applications.
www.OnBarcode.com
Code 3 Of 9 Decoder In Java
Using Barcode decoder for Java Control to read, scan read, scan image in Java applications.
www.OnBarcode.com
Best so far
GTIN - 128 Creator In Java
Using Barcode creator for Java Control to generate, create GTIN - 128 image in Java applications.
www.OnBarcode.com
QR Code Printer In Java
Using Barcode creator for Java Control to generate, create QR Code image in Java applications.
www.OnBarcode.com
We ve got to the end of the first join order. Every time we get to the end of a join order, the optimizer checks the cost against the best cost so far, and if the latest cost is better, it gets reported and remembered. The first cost is, of course, the best so far because there has been no previous cost. The instances of TABLE# correspond to the table numbers listed in the first join order. The figures by CST, CDN, and BYTES are the figures that would appear in the plan table as the columns cost, cardinality, and bytes. You can see in the Join result at the end of the previous section that we have a fields called cdn (cardinality) and rcz (the record size) the BYTES figure that follows comes from the product of these two figures. Best so far: TABLE#: 0 Best so far: TABLE#: 1 Best so far: TABLE#: 2 Best so far: TABLE#: 3 *********************** CST: CST: CST: CST: 2517 2586 2587 2588 CDN: CDN: CDN: CDN: 68 1 1 1 BYTES: BYTES: BYTES: BYTES: 1836 54 77 96
Draw Data Matrix ECC200 In Java
Using Barcode maker for Java Control to generate, create Data Matrix image in Java applications.
www.OnBarcode.com
DataMatrix Generator In Java
Using Barcode encoder for Java Control to generate, create DataMatrix image in Java applications.
www.OnBarcode.com
Join order[2]
Barcode Generation In Java
Using Barcode creation for Java Control to generate, create Barcode image in Java applications.
www.OnBarcode.com
Identcode Encoder In Java
Using Barcode creator for Java Control to generate, create Identcode image in Java applications.
www.OnBarcode.com
We move on to the second join order. For a small number of tables (typically five or less), Oracle will do a simple cyclic permutation of the tables, starting from the end of the first join order, working through all possible permutations. So the second join order simply swaps the last two tables. Join order[2]: CHILD[C]#0 PARENT[P]#1 GREATGRANDPARENT[GGP]#3 GRANDPARENT[GP]#2
Code 39 Printer In None
Using Barcode printer for Word Control to generate, create ANSI/AIM Code 39 image in Word applications.
www.OnBarcode.com
Code 39 Full ASCII Generator In Objective-C
Using Barcode printer for iPad Control to generate, create Code 39 Extended image in iPad applications.
www.OnBarcode.com
Wait a moment why does the next line in the trace file say we are joining greatgrandparent Surely it should be parent No because Oracle has remembered that Join order [1] started with child parent, and has carried the intermediate results of that join forward to this join order. Remember, as the SQL statements get larger, the amount of memory used to optimize them increases. This is partly because Oracle has to remember more and more intermediate results as the number of tables increases. Now joining: GREATGRANDPARENT[GGP]#3 ******* NL Join Outer table: cost: 2586 cdn: 1 rcz: 54 resp: 2586 Inner table: GREATGRANDPARENT Alias: GGP Access Path: table-scan Resc: 64 Join: Resc: 2650 Resp: 2650 Best NL cost: 2650 resp: 2650 Join Card: 195.53 = outer (0.75) * inner (261.26) * sel (1.0000e+000) *********************** What happened to the SM Join and the HA Join Where s the line saying Now Joining: GRANDPARENT We are about to jump into Join order [3] without completing Join order [2]. Look at the cost of completing the nested loop join to greatgrandparent (2,650) it has already exceeded the best cost (2,588) for the complete query, so there is no point in going on with this join order, and the optimizer takes a shortcut.
Data Matrix 2d Barcode Printer In VB.NET
Using Barcode creator for VS .NET Control to generate, create ECC200 image in .NET applications.
www.OnBarcode.com
Encode UPC - 13 In Java
Using Barcode creator for Android Control to generate, create EAN / UCC - 13 image in Android applications.
www.OnBarcode.com
CHAPTER 14 THE 10053 TRACE FILE
Make UCC - 12 In Visual Basic .NET
Using Barcode maker for .NET Control to generate, create UPC Code image in VS .NET applications.
www.OnBarcode.com
Encoding Linear In Visual Studio .NET
Using Barcode creation for Visual Studio .NET Control to generate, create Linear 1D Barcode image in Visual Studio .NET applications.
www.OnBarcode.com
The reason why you don t see the merge join or hash join is that the join to greatgrandparent is a Cartesian join, so the best possible join cost would have to be at least the sum of the outer table cost plus the inner table cost. There is no point in saying this three times. There is a subtle point in this join order that isn t immediately obvious. Oracle has treated the join from child grandparent as a Cartesian join but we know (from the table definition code) that the primary key of the child table actually starts with the key of the greatgrandparent, and that that column should have propagated down through the join. But this is an example where Oracle does not apply transitive closure. We can see (rearranging our query) that and and child.id_ggp = parent.id_ggp parent.id_ggp = grandparent.id_ggp grandparent.id_ggp = greatgrandparent.id
Generating 2D In VS .NET
Using Barcode creation for .NET framework Control to generate, create Matrix image in .NET applications.
www.OnBarcode.com
Data Matrix Creation In .NET
Using Barcode maker for ASP.NET Control to generate, create Data Matrix ECC200 image in ASP.NET applications.
www.OnBarcode.com
So we can infer that child.id_ggp = greatgrandparent.id. But the optimizer does not attempt to apply this logic.
Reading Code 128 In C#.NET
Using Barcode decoder for .NET Control to read, scan read, scan image in VS .NET applications.
www.OnBarcode.com
Painting Barcode In Java
Using Barcode drawer for BIRT Control to generate, create Barcode image in Eclipse BIRT applications.
www.OnBarcode.com
Join order[3]
Barcode Scanner In Visual Basic .NET
Using Barcode Control SDK for Visual Studio .NET Control to generate, create, read, scan barcode image in VS .NET applications.
www.OnBarcode.com
UPC-A Maker In Objective-C
Using Barcode generator for iPad Control to generate, create UCC - 12 image in iPad applications.
www.OnBarcode.com
As we go into Join Order[3], the change cycles another step closer to the front of the join order. We ve tried all the orders that start with (child, parent), so we move on to starting with (child, grandparent). Again we stop without testing the whole join order, and without testing the merge and hash joins on the very first join. Moreover, we don t even report the join (child, grandparent, greatgrandparent, parent) that ought to be the next order. There s no point in looking at it; we already know that anything starting with (child, grandparent) is too expensive. Join order[3]: CHILD[C]#0 GRANDPARENT[GP]#2 PARENT[P]#1 GREATGRANDPARENT[GGP]#3 Now joining: GRANDPARENT[GP]#2 ******* NL Join Outer table: cost: 2517 cdn: 68 rcz: 27 resp: 2517 Inner table: GRANDPARENT Alias: GP Access Path: table-scan Resc: 126 Join: Resc: 11074 Resp: 11074 Best NL cost: 11074 resp: 11074 Join Card: 7497.70 = outer (68.01) * inner (110.25) * sel (1.0000e+000) ***********************
Join order[4]
The same short-circuiting effect appears as we cycle the next table into second place (child, greatgrandparent); we evaluate the first join (and only the nested loop option) and find that it is more expensive than the best so far, so we don t complete the join order, and don t examine any other join orders that start the same way.
Copyright © OnBarcode.com . All rights reserved.