jump to navigation

Possible Impact To Clustering Factor Now ROWIDs Are Updated When Rows Migrate Part I (“Growin’ Up”) March 1, 2023

Posted by Richard Foote in 19c, 19c New Features, Attribute Clustering, Autonomous Data Warehouse, Autonomous Database, Autonomous Transaction Processing, BLEVEL, CBO, Changing ROWID, Clustering Factor, Data Clustering, Hints, Index Access Path, Index Block Splits, Index Delete Operations, Index Height, Index Internals, Index Rebuild, Index statistics, Leaf Blocks, Migrated Rows, Oracle, Oracle Blog, Oracle Cloud, Oracle Cost Based Optimizer, Oracle General, Oracle Indexes, Oracle Indexing Internals Webinar, Oracle Statistics, Oracle19c, Performance Tuning, Richard Foote Training, Richard's Blog, ROWID.
2 comments

In my previous post I discussed how an index can potentially be somewhat inflated in size after ROWIDs are updated on the fly after a substantial number of rows are migrated.

However, there’s another key “factor” of an index that in some scenarios can be impacted by this new ROWID behaviour with regard migrated rows.

To highlight this scenario, I’ll again start by creating and populating a table with ENABLE ROW MOVEMENT disabled:

SQL> create table bowie(id number, code1 number, code2 number, code3 number, code4 number, code5 number, code6 number, code7 number, code8 number, code9 number, code10 number, code11 number, code12 number, code13 number, code14 number, code15 number, code16 number, code17 number, code18 number, code19 number, code20 number, name varchar2(142)) PCTFREE 0;

Table BOWIE created.

SQL> insert into bowie SELECT rownum, rownum, rownum, rownum, rownum, rownum, rownum, rownum, rownum, rownum, rownum, rownum, rownum, rownum, rownum, rownum, rownum, rownum, rownum, rownum, rownum, 'BOWIE' FROM dual CONNECT BY LEVEL <= 200000;

200,000 rows inserted.

SQL> commit;

Commit complete.

SQL> exec dbms_stats.gather_table_stats(ownname=>null, tabname=>'BOWIE', estimate_percent=> null, no_invalidate=>false);

PL/SQL procedure successfully completed.

I’ll next create an index on the ID column. The important aspect with the ID column is that the data is entered monotonically in ID column order, so the associated index will have an excellent (very low) Clustering Factor:

SQL> create index bowie_id_i on bowie(id);

Index BOWIE_ID_I created.

If we look at some key statistics of the table and index:

SQL> select table_name, num_rows, blocks from user_tables where table_name='BOWIE';

   TABLE_NAME    NUM_ROWS    BLOCKS
_____________ ___________ _________
BOWIE              200000      3268

SQL> select index_name, blevel, leaf_blocks, clustering_factor from user_indexes where table_name='BOWIE';

   INDEX_NAME    BLEVEL    LEAF_BLOCKS    CLUSTERING_FACTOR
_____________ _________ ______________ ____________________
BOWIE_ID_I            1            473                 3250

We can see that the number of table blocks is 3268, the number of index leaf blocks is 473 and we indeed have a near perfect Clustering Factor of 3250.

If we run a couple of queries:

SQL> select * from bowie where id between 1 and 1000;

1,000 rows selected.

PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
SQL_ID gz5u92hmjwz1h, child number 0
-------------------------------------
select * from bowie where id between 1 and 1000

Plan hash value: 1405654398

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id | Operation                            | Name       | Starts | E-Rows | A-Rows | A-Time     | Buffers |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|  0 | SELECT STATEMENT                     |            |      1 |        |   1000 |00:00:00.01 |      18 |
|  1 |  TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID BATCHED | BOWIE      |      1 |   1000 |   1000 |00:00:00.01 |      18 |
|* 2 |   INDEX RANGE SCAN                   | BOWIE_ID_I |      1 |   1000 |   1000 |00:00:00.01 |       4 |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
---------------------------------------------------

   2 - access("ID">=1 AND "ID"<=1000)

Note
-----
   - automatic DOP: Computed Degree of Parallelism is 1 because of no expensive parallel operation

Statistics
-----------------------------------------------------------
          1 CPU used by this session
          1 CPU used when call started
       7353 RM usage
          3 Requests to/from client
          2 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
         16 buffer is not pinned count
       1985 buffer is pinned count
        324 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
     171305 bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
          2 calls to get snapshot scn: kcmgss
          2 calls to kcmgcs
         18 consistent gets
          1 consistent gets examination
          1 consistent gets examination (fastpath)
         18 consistent gets from cache
         17 consistent gets pin
         17 consistent gets pin (fastpath)
          2 execute count
          1 index range scans
     147456 logical read bytes from cache
         17 no work - consistent read gets
         38 non-idle wait count
          2 opened cursors cumulative
          1 opened cursors current
          2 parse count (total)
          1 process last non-idle time
          2 session cursor cache count
         18 session logical reads
          1 sorts (memory)
       2024 sorts (rows)
       1000 table fetch by rowid
          3 user calls

We can see for this first query that returns 1000 rows, it requires just 18 consistent gets, thanks primarily due to the efficient index with the perfect Clustering Factor.

If we look at the cost of this plan:

SQL> SELECT * FROM TABLE(DBMS_XPLAN.display_cursor(sql_id=>'gz5u92hmjwz1h',format=>'ALLSTATS LAST +cost +bytes'));

PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
SQL_ID gz5u92hmjwz1h, child number 0

-------------------------------------

select * from bowie where id between 1 and 1000

Plan hash value: 1405654398

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id | Operation                            | Name       | Starts | E-Rows |E-Bytes| Cost (%CPU)| A-Rows | A-Time     | Buffers |
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|  0 | SELECT STATEMENT                     |            |      1 |        |       |    21 (100)|   1000 |00:00:00.01 |      18 |
|  1 |  TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID BATCHED | BOWIE      |      1 |   1000 |   108K|      21 (0)|   1000 |00:00:00.01 |      18 |
|* 2 |   INDEX RANGE SCAN                   | BOWIE_ID_I |      1 |   1000 |       |       4 (0)|   1000 |00:00:00.01 |       4 |
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Predicate Information (identified by operation id):

---------------------------------------------------

   2 - access("ID">=1 AND "ID"<=1000)

We can see the plan has an accurate cost of just 21.

If we now run a similar query that returns a few more rows:

SQL> select * from bowie where id between 1 and 4200;

4,200 rows selected.

PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
SQL_ID c376kdhy5b0x9, child number 0
-------------------------------------
select * from bowie where id between 1 and 4200

Plan hash value: 1405654398

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id | Operation                            | Name       | Starts | E-Rows | A-Rows | A-Time     | Buffers |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|  0 | SELECT STATEMENT                     |            |      1 |        |   4200 |00:00:00.01 |      68 |
|  1 |  TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID BATCHED | BOWIE      |      1 |   4200 |   4200 |00:00:00.01 |      68 |
|* 2 |   INDEX RANGE SCAN                   | BOWIE_ID_I |      1 |   4200 |   4200 |00:00:00.01 |      11 |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
---------------------------------------------------

   2 - access("ID">=1 AND "ID"<=4200)

Note
-----
   - automatic DOP: Computed Degree of Parallelism is 1 because of no expensive parallel operation

Statistics
-----------------------------------------------------------
          1 CPU used by this session
          1 CPU used when call started
          1 DB time
      11353 RM usage
          3 Requests to/from client
          2 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
         59 buffer is not pinned count
       8342 buffer is pinned count
        324 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
     461834 bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
          2 calls to get snapshot scn: kcmgss
          2 calls to kcmgcs
         68 consistent gets
          1 consistent gets examination
          1 consistent gets examination (fastpath)
         68 consistent gets from cache
         67 consistent gets pin
         67 consistent gets pin (fastpath)
          2 execute count
          1 index range scans
     557056 logical read bytes from cache
         67 no work - consistent read gets
         73 non-idle wait count
         2 opened cursors cumulative
         1 opened cursors current
         2 parse count (total)
         1 process last non-idle time
         2 session cursor cache count
        68 session logical reads
         1 sorts (memory)
      2024 sorts (rows)
      4200 table fetch by rowid
         3 user calls

We can see that it only required just 68 consistent gets to return 4200 rows, thanks to the excellent data clustering and associated very low Clustering Factor.

If we look at the cost of this plan:

SQL> SELECT * FROM TABLE(DBMS_XPLAN.display_cursor(sql_id=>'c376kdhy5b0x9',format=>'ALLSTATS LAST +cost +bytes'));

PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
SQL_ID c376kdhy5b0x9, child number 0

-------------------------------------

select * from bowie where id between 1 and 4200

Plan hash value: 1405654398

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id | Operation                            | Name       | Starts | E-Rows |E-Bytes| Cost (%CPU)| A-Rows | A-Time     | Buffers |
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|  0 | SELECT STATEMENT                     |            |      1 |        |       |    80 (100)|   4200 |00:00:00.01 |      68 |
|  1 |  TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID BATCHED | BOWIE      |      1 |   4200 |   455K|      80 (0)|   4200 |00:00:00.01 |      68 |
|* 2 |   INDEX RANGE SCAN                   | BOWIE_ID_I |      1 |   4200 |       |      11 (0)|   4200 |00:00:00.01 |      11 |
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Predicate Information (identified by operation id):

---------------------------------------------------

   2 - access("ID">=1 AND "ID"<=4200)

 

We can see the cost of the plan is currently a relatively accurate 80.

OK, let’s now perform an update on this table that generates a bunch of migrated rows:

SQL> update bowie set name='THE RISE AND FALL OF BOWIE STARDUST AND THE SPIDERS FROM MARS';

200,000 rows updated.

SQL> commit;

Commit complete.

If we now look at the table and index statistics:

SQL> exec dbms_stats.gather_table_stats(ownname=>null, tabname=>'BOWIE', estimate_percent=> null, no_invalidate=>false);

PL/SQL procedure successfully completed.

SQL> select table_name, num_rows, blocks from user_tables where table_name='BOWIE';

   TABLE_NAME    NUM_ROWS    BLOCKS
_____________ ___________ _________
BOWIE              200000      4906

We can see that the table blocks value has increased to 4906 (previously 3268). This as explained previously is to due in large part to the increased NAME column values and also due to the pointers in the original table blocks that point to the new locations of the migrated rows.

This relates to approximately a 50% increase in table blocks.

If we look at the current index statistics:

SQL> select index_name, blevel, leaf_blocks, clustering_factor from user_indexes where table_name='BOWIE';

   INDEX_NAME    BLEVEL    LEAF_BLOCKS    CLUSTERING_FACTOR
_____________ _________ ______________ ____________________
BOWIE_ID_I            1            473                 3250

We can see that these values are all unchanged, as the ROWIDs in indexes remain unchanged when a row migrates, when ENABLE ROW MOVEMENT is not set.

Therefore, when we re-run these same queries:

SQL> select * from bowie where id between 1 and 1000;

1,000 rows selected.

PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
SQL_ID gz5u92hmjwz1h, child number 0
-------------------------------------
select * from bowie where id between 1 and 1000

Plan hash value: 1405654398

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id | Operation                            | Name       | Starts | E-Rows | A-Rows | A-Time     | Buffers |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|  0 | SELECT STATEMENT                     |            |      1 |        |   1000 |00:00:00.01 |     666 |
|  1 |  TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID BATCHED | BOWIE      |      1 |   1000 |   1000 |00:00:00.01 |     666 |
|* 2 |   INDEX RANGE SCAN                   | BOWIE_ID_I |      1 |   1000 |   1000 |00:00:00.01 |       4 |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
---------------------------------------------------

   2 - access("ID">=1 AND "ID"<=1000)

Note
-----
   - automatic DOP: Computed Degree of Parallelism is 1 because of no expensive parallel operation

Statistics
-----------------------------------------------------------
          1 DB time
       7967 RM usage
          3 Requests to/from client
          2 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
        664 buffer is not pinned count
       1664 buffer is pinned count
        324 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
     171419 bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
          2 calls to get snapshot scn: kcmgss
          2 calls to kcmgcs
        666 consistent gets
          1 consistent gets examination
          1 consistent gets examination (fastpath)
        666 consistent gets from cache
        665 consistent gets pin
        665 consistent gets pin (fastpath)
          2 execute count
          1 index range scans
    5455872 logical read bytes from cache
        665 no work - consistent read gets
         37 non-idle wait count
          2 opened cursors cumulative
          1 opened cursors current
          2 parse count (total)
          1 process last non-idle time
          2 session cursor cache count
        666 session logical reads
          1 sorts (memory)
       2024 sorts (rows)
       1000 table fetch by rowid
        327 table fetch continued row
          3 user calls

The number of consistent gets has increased significantly to 666 (previously it was just 18).

Now we can attributed an increase of approximately 50% of the previous consistent gets (18 x 0.50 = 9) due to the 50% increase in table blocks required now to store the rows due to the increased row size.

We can also attribute an additional 327 consistent gets for the table fetch continued row value listed in the statistics, representing the extra consistent gets required to access the migrated rows from their new physical location.

But 18 + 9 + 327 = 354 still leaves us short of the new 666 consistent gets value.

The problem with having to visit another table block to get a row from its new location is that it means Oracle has to re-access again the original table block to get the next row (rather than reading multiple rows with the same consistent get).

So it’s actually approximately 2 x table fetch continued row, by which the number of consistent gets is going to increase when accessing migrated rows (noting that the last migrated row in a block will only incur a additional consistent get as the next table block accessed will differ regardless).

If we look at the new CBO cost for this plan:

SQL> SELECT * FROM TABLE(DBMS_XPLAN.display_cursor(sql_id=>'gz5u92hmjwz1h',format=>'ALLSTATS LAST +cost +bytes'));

PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
SQL_ID gz5u92hmjwz1h, child number 0

-------------------------------------

select * from bowie where id between 1 and 1000

Plan hash value: 1405654398

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id | Operation                            | Name       | Starts | E-Rows |E-Bytes| Cost (%CPU)| A-Rows | A-Time     | Buffers |
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|  0 | SELECT STATEMENT                     |            |      1 |        |       |    21 (100)|   1000 |00:00:00.01 |     666 |
|  1 |  TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID BATCHED | BOWIE      |      1 |   1000 |   163K|      21 (0)|   1000 |00:00:00.01 |     666 |
|* 2 |   INDEX RANGE SCAN                   | BOWIE_ID_I |      1 |   1000 |       |       4 (0)|   1000 |00:00:00.01 |       4 |
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Predicate Information (identified by operation id):

---------------------------------------------------

   2 - access("ID">=1 AND "ID"<=1000)

 

We notice the CBO cost for this plan remains unchanged at 21.

This is totally to be expected, as the index statistics by which the cost of an index scan is calculated are unchanged.

Considering the rough “rule of thumb” is that the CBO cost of an index scan should be in the ball-park of the number of possible IOs, the fact the plan now uses 666 consistent gets highlights this cost of just 21 is no longer as accurate…

If we look at the second SQL that returns 4200 rows:

SQL> select * from bowie where id between 1 and 4200;

4,200 rows selected.

PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
SQL_ID c376kdhy5b0x9, child number 0
-------------------------------------
select * from bowie where id between 1 and 4200

Plan hash value: 1405654398

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id | Operation                            | Name       | Starts | E-Rows | A-Rows | A-Time     | Buffers |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|  0 | SELECT STATEMENT                     |            |      1 |        |   4200 |00:00:00.01 |    2771 |
|  1 |  TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID BATCHED | BOWIE      |      1 |   4200 |   4200 |00:00:00.01 |    2771 |
|* 2 |   INDEX RANGE SCAN                   | BOWIE_ID_I |      1 |   4200 |   4200 |00:00:00.01 |      11 |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
---------------------------------------------------

   2 - access("ID">=1 AND "ID"<=4200)

Note
-----
   - automatic DOP: Computed Degree of Parallelism is 1 because of no expensive parallel operation

Statistics
-----------------------------------------------------------
          2 CPU used by this session
          2 CPU used when call started
          2 DB time
      14103 RM usage
          3 Requests to/from client
          2 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
       2762 buffer is not pinned count
       7005 buffer is pinned count
        324 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
      461947 bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
           2 calls to get snapshot scn: kcmgss
           2 calls to kcmgcs
        2771 consistent gets
           1 consistent gets examination
           1 consistent gets examination (fastpath)
        2771 consistent gets from cache
        2770 consistent gets pin
        2770 consistent gets pin (fastpath)
           2 execute count
           1 index range scans
    22700032 logical read bytes from cache
        2770 no work - consistent read gets
          72 non-idle wait count
           2 opened cursors cumulative
           1 opened cursors current
           2 parse count (total)
           1 process last non-idle time
           2 session cursor cache count
        2771 session logical reads
           1 sorts (memory)
        2024 sorts (rows)
        4200 table fetch by rowid
        1366 table fetch continued row
           3 user calls

We again notice consistent gets has increased significantly to 2771 (previously it was just 68). Again, these additional consistent gets can not be attributed to the extra size of the table and the additional approximate 2 x 1366 table fetch continued row gets.

If we now look at the cost of this plan:

SQL> SELECT * FROM TABLE(DBMS_XPLAN.display_cursor(sql_id=>'c376kdhy5b0x9',format=>'ALLSTATS LAST +cost +bytes'));

PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
____________

SQL_ID c376kdhy5b0x9, child number 0

-------------------------------------

select * from bowie where id between 1 and 4200

Plan hash value: 1405654398

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id | Operation                            | Name       | Starts | E-Rows |E-Bytes| Cost (%CPU)| A-Rows | A-Time     | Buffers |
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|  0 | SELECT STATEMENT                     |            |      1 |        |       |    80 (100)|   4200 |00:00:00.01 |    2771 |
|  1 |  TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID BATCHED | BOWIE      |      1 |   4200 |   684K|      80 (0)|   4200 |00:00:00.01 |    2771 |
|* 2 |   INDEX RANGE SCAN                   | BOWIE_ID_I |      1 |   4200 |       |      11 (0)|   4200 |00:00:00.01 |      11 |
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Predicate Information (identified by operation id):

---------------------------------------------------

   2 - access("ID">=1 AND "ID"<=4200)

 

We again notice the CBO cost for this plan remains unchanged at 80, again totally expected as the underlying index statistics have remain unchanged after the update statement.

But again, not necessary as accurate a cost as it was previously…

 

If we repeat this demo, but this time on a table with ENABLE ROW MOVEMENT enabled:

SQL> create table bowie2(id number, code1 number, code2 number, code3 number, code4 number, code5 number, code6 number, code7 number, code8 number, code9 number, code10 number, code11 number, code12 number, code13 number, code14 number, code15 number, code16 number, code17 number, code18 number, code19 number, code20 number, name varchar2(142)) PCTFREE 0 ENABLE ROW MOVEMENT;

Table BOWIE2 created.

SQL> insert into bowie2 SELECT rownum, rownum, rownum, rownum, rownum, rownum, rownum, rownum, rownum, rownum, rownum, rownum, rownum, rownum, rownum, rownum, rownum, rownum, rownum, rownum, rownum, 'BOWIE' FROM dual CONNECT BY LEVEL <= 200000;

200,000 rows inserted.

SQL> commit;

Commit complete.

SQL> exec dbms_stats.gather_table_stats(ownname=>null, tabname=>'BOWIE2', estimate_percent=> null, no_invalidate=>false);

PL/SQL procedure successfully completed.

SQL> create index bowie2_id_i on bowie2(id);

Index BOWIE2_ID_I created.

SQL> select table_name, num_rows, blocks from user_tables where table_name='BOWIE2';

   TABLE_NAME    NUM_ROWS    BLOCKS
_____________ ___________ _________
BOWIE2             200000      3268

SQL> select index_name, blevel, leaf_blocks, clustering_factor from user_indexes where table_name='BOWIE2';

        INDEX_NAME    BLEVEL    LEAF_BLOCKS    CLUSTERING_FACTOR
__________________ _________ ______________ ____________________
BOWIE2_ID_I                1            473                 3250

 

The table and index statistics are currently identical to the previous demo.

If we run the same two equivalent queries:

 

SQL> select * from bowie2 where id between 1 and 1000;

1,000 rows selected.

PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
SQL_ID gtkw2704bxj7q, child number 0
-------------------------------------
select * from bowie2 where id between 1 and 1000

Plan hash value: 3243780227

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id | Operation                            | Name        | Starts | E-Rows | A-Rows | A-Time     | Buffers |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|  0 | SELECT STATEMENT                     |             |      1 |        |   1000 |00:00:00.01 |      18 |
|  1 |  TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID BATCHED | BOWIE2      |      1 |   1000 |   1000 |00:00:00.01 |      18 |
|* 2 |   INDEX RANGE SCAN                   | BOWIE2_ID_I |      1 |   1000 |   1000 |00:00:00.01 |       4 |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
---------------------------------------------------

   2 - access("ID">=1 AND "ID"<=1000)

Note
-----
   - automatic DOP: Computed Degree of Parallelism is 1 because of no expensive parallel operation

Statistics
-----------------------------------------------------------
          1 CPU used by this session
          1 CPU used when call started
       7909 RM usage
          3 Requests to/from client
          2 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
         16 buffer is not pinned count
       1985 buffer is pinned count
        325 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
     171306 bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
          2 calls to get snapshot scn: kcmgss
          2 calls to kcmgcs
         18 consistent gets
          1 consistent gets examination
          1 consistent gets examination (fastpath)
         18 consistent gets from cache
         17 consistent gets pin
         17 consistent gets pin (fastpath)
          2 execute count
          1 index range scans
     147456 logical read bytes from cache
         17 no work - consistent read gets
         37 non-idle wait count
          2 opened cursors cumulative
          1 opened cursors current
          2 parse count (total)
          1 process last non-idle time
          2 session cursor cache count
         18 session logical reads
          1 sorts (memory)
       2024 sorts (rows)
       1000 table fetch by rowid
     3 user calls

SQL> SELECT * FROM TABLE(DBMS_XPLAN.display_cursor(sql_id=>'gtkw2704bxj7q',format=>'ALLSTATS LAST +cost +bytes'));

PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
SQL_ID gtkw2704bxj7q, child number 0

-------------------------------------

select * from bowie2 where id between 1 and 1000

Plan hash value: 3243780227

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id | Operation                            | Name        | Starts | E-Rows |E-Bytes| Cost (%CPU)| A-Rows | A-Time     | Buffers |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|  0 | SELECT STATEMENT                     |             |      1 |        |       |    21 (100)|   1000 |00:00:00.01 |      18 |
|  1 |  TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID BATCHED | BOWIE2      |      1 |   1000 |   108K|      21 (0)|   1000 |00:00:00.01 |      18 |
|* 2 |   INDEX RANGE SCAN                   | BOWIE2_ID_I |      1 |   1000 |       |       4 (0)|   1000 |00:00:00.01 |       4 |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Predicate Information (identified by operation id):

---------------------------------------------------

   2 - access("ID">=1 AND "ID"<=1000)



SQL> select * from bowie2 where id between 1 and 4200;

4,200 rows selected.

PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
SQL_ID 25qktyn35b662, child number 0
-------------------------------------
select * from bowie2 where id between 1 and 4200

Plan hash value: 3243780227

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id | Operation                            | Name        | Starts | E-Rows | A-Rows | A-Time     | Buffers |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|  0 | SELECT STATEMENT                     |             |      1 |        |   4200 |00:00:00.01 |      68 |
|  1 |  TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID BATCHED | BOWIE2      |      1 |   4200 |   4200 |00:00:00.01 |      68 |
|* 2 |   INDEX RANGE SCAN                   | BOWIE2_ID_I |      1 |   4200 |   4200 |00:00:00.01 |      11 |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
---------------------------------------------------

   2 - access("ID">=1 AND "ID"<=4200)

Note
-----
   - automatic DOP: Computed Degree of Parallelism is 1 because of no expensive parallel operation

Statistics
-----------------------------------------------------------
          1 CPU used by this session
          1 CPU used when call started
          2 DB time
      13157 RM usage
          3 Requests to/from client
          2 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
         59 buffer is not pinned count
       8342 buffer is pinned count
        325 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
     461838 bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
          2 calls to get snapshot scn: kcmgss
          2 calls to kcmgcs
         68 consistent gets
          1 consistent gets examination
          1 consistent gets examination (fastpath)
         68 consistent gets from cache
         67 consistent gets pin
         67 consistent gets pin (fastpath)
          2 execute count
          1 index range scans
     557056 logical read bytes from cache
         67 no work - consistent read gets
         73 non-idle wait count
          2 opened cursors cumulative
          1 opened cursors current
          2 parse count (total)
          1 process last non-idle time
          2 session cursor cache count
         68 session logical reads
          1 sorts (memory)
       2024 sorts (rows)
       4200 table fetch by rowid
          3 user calls

SQL> SELECT * FROM TABLE(DBMS_XPLAN.display_cursor(sql_id=>'25qktyn35b662',format=>'ALLSTATS LAST +cost +bytes'));

PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
SQL_ID 25qktyn35b662, child number 0

-------------------------------------

select * from bowie2 where id between 1 and 4200

Plan hash value: 3243780227

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id | Operation                            | Name        | Starts | E-Rows |E-Bytes| Cost (%CPU)| A-Rows | A-Time     | Buffers |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|  0 | SELECT STATEMENT                     |             |      1 |        |       |    80 (100)|   4200 |00:00:00.01 |      68 |
|  1 |  TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID BATCHED | BOWIE2      |      1 |   4200 |   455K|      80 (0)|   4200 |00:00:00.01 |      68 |
|* 2 |   INDEX RANGE SCAN                   | BOWIE2_ID_I |      1 |   4200 |       |      11 (0)|   4200 |00:00:00.01 |      11 |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Predicate Information (identified by operation id):

---------------------------------------------------

   2 - access("ID">=1 AND "ID"<=4200)

 

With identical table/index statistics, we notice as expected that both SQLs have the same consistent gets and CBO costs as with the previous demo.

If we now repeat the equivalent Update statement:

SQL> update bowie2 set name='THE RISE AND FALL OF BOWIE STARDUST AND THE SPIDERS FROM MARS';

200,000 rows updated.

SQL> commit;

Commit complete.

SQL> exec dbms_stats.gather_table_stats(ownname=>null, tabname=>'BOWIE2', estimate_percent=> null, no_invalidate=>false);

PL/SQL procedure successfully completed.

 

If we look at the table statistics:

SQL> select table_name, num_rows, blocks from user_tables where table_name='BOWIE2';

   TABLE_NAME   NUM_ROWS     BLOCKS
_____________ ___________ _________
BOWIE2             200000      4654

 

We notice the number of table blocks has increased to 4654 due to the increased row lengths, but not as much as with the previous demo (where table blocks increased to 4906) as in this scenario, Oracle does not have to store the row location pointers in the original blocks for the migrated rows.

If we look at the index statistics:

SQL> select index_name, blevel, leaf_blocks, clustering_factor from user_indexes where table_name='BOWIE2';

    INDEX_NAME    BLEVEL    LEAF_BLOCKS    CLUSTERING_FACTOR
______________ _________ ______________ ____________________
BOWIE2_ID_I            2            945               109061

We notice that these are substantially different from the first demo, where ROWIDs for migrated rows are not updated on the fly.

By now updating the ROWIDs, the indexes can possibly increase in size as they have to store both the previous and new ROWIDs in separate index entries and hence Oracle is more likely to perform additional index block splits (as I discussed in my previous post).

The LEAF_BLOCKS are now 945 (previously 473) and even the BLEVEL has increased from 1 to 2.

Additionally, and perhaps importantly for specific key indexes, the Clustering Factor value of indexes can also be impacted. By migrating rows and physically storing them in different locations, this can potentially detrimentally impact the tight clustering of rows based on specific column values.

The Clustering Factor for the index on the monotonically increased ID column has now increased significantly to 109061, up from the previously perfect 3250.

So columns that have naturally good clustering (e.g.: monotonically increasing values such as IDs and dates) or have been manually well clustered for performance purposes, can have the Clustering Factor of associated indexes detrimentally impacted by migrated rows.

If we re-run the first query:

SQL> select * from bowie2 where id between 1 and 1000;

1,000 rows selected.

PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
SQL_ID gtkw2704bxj7q, child number 0
-------------------------------------
select * from bowie2 where id between 1 and 1000

Plan hash value: 3243780227

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id | Operation                            | Name        | Starts | E-Rows | A-Rows | A-Time     | Buffers |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|  0 | SELECT STATEMENT                     |             |      1 |        |   1000 |00:00:00.01 |     639 |
|  1 |  TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID BATCHED | BOWIE2      |      1 |   1000 |   1000 |00:00:00.01 |     639 |
|* 2 |   INDEX RANGE SCAN                   | BOWIE2_ID_I |      1 |   1000 |   1000 |00:00:00.01 |       7 |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
---------------------------------------------------

   2 - access("ID">=1 AND "ID"<=1000)

Note
-----
   - automatic DOP: Computed Degree of Parallelism is 1 because of no expensive parallel operation

Statistics
-----------------------------------------------------------
          1 CPU used by this session
          1 CPU used when call started
          1 DB time
      15262 RM usage
          3 Requests to/from client
          2 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
        634 buffer is not pinned count
       1367 buffer is pinned count
        325 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
     171421 bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
          2 calls to get snapshot scn: kcmgss
          2 calls to kcmgcs
        639 consistent gets
          2 consistent gets examination
          2 consistent gets examination (fastpath)
        639 consistent gets from cache
        637 consistent gets pin
        637 consistent gets pin (fastpath)
          2 execute count
          1 index range scans
    5234688 logical read bytes from cache
        637 no work - consistent read gets
         38 non-idle wait count
          1 non-idle wait time
          2 opened cursors cumulative
          1 opened cursors current
          2 parse count (total)
          1 process last non-idle time
          2 session cursor cache count
        639 session logical reads
          1 sorts (memory)
       2024 sorts (rows)
       1000 table fetch by rowid
          3 user calls

I discussed in a previous post how by updating the ROWIDs of migrated rows we can improve performance, as Oracle can go directly to the correct new physical location of a migrated row.

But for some specific indexes, where data clustering is crucial, and we have a significant number migrated rows, this might not necessarily be the case.

We can see consistent gets here has increased to 639 (previously is was just 21), and so not hugely different from the 666 consistent gets required to fetch the migrated rows when the ROWIDs were not updated in the first demo.

If we look at the CBO costings:

SQL> SELECT * FROM TABLE(DBMS_XPLAN.display_cursor(sql_id=>'gtkw2704bxj7q',format=>'ALLSTATS LAST +cost +bytes'));

PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
SQL_ID gtkw2704bxj7q, child number 0

-------------------------------------

select * from bowie2 where id between 1 and 1000

Plan hash value: 3243780227

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id | Operation                            | Name        | Starts | E-Rows |E-Bytes| Cost (%CPU)| A-Rows | A-Time     | Buffers |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|  0 | SELECT STATEMENT                     |             |      1 |        |       |   553 (100)|   1000 |00:00:00.01 |     639 |
|  1 |  TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID BATCHED | BOWIE2      |      1 |   1000 |   163K|     553 (0)|   1000 |00:00:00.01 |     639 |
|* 2 |   INDEX RANGE SCAN                   | BOWIE2_ID_I |      1 |   1000 |       |       7 (0)|   1000 |00:00:00.01 |       7 |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Predicate Information (identified by operation id):

---------------------------------------------------

   2 - access("ID">=1 AND "ID"<=1000)

 

We can see the CBO cost has increased significantly to 553 (previously it was just 21).

With a much increased Clustering Factor, this will obviously impact the CBO costs of associated index scans.

In very extreme cases, these possible changes in the Clustering Factor can even impact the viability of using the index.

If we re-run the second query returning the 4200 rows:

SQL> select * from bowie2 where id between 1 and 4200;

4,200 rows selected.

PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
SQL_ID 25qktyn35b662, child number 0
-------------------------------------
select * from bowie2 where id between 1 and 4200

Plan hash value: 1495904576

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id | Operation                  | Name   | Starts | E-Rows | A-Rows | A-Time     | Buffers |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|  0 | SELECT STATEMENT           |        |      1 |        |   4200 |00:00:00.02 |    4572 |
|* 1 |  TABLE ACCESS STORAGE FULL | BOWIE2 |      1 |   4200 |   4200 |00:00:00.02 |    4572 |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
---------------------------------------------------

   1 - storage(("ID"<=4200 AND "ID">=1))
       filter(("ID"<=4200 AND "ID">=1))

We can see that the CBO has now chosen to perform a Full Table Scan (FTS), rather than use the now less efficient index to return this number of rows.

If we look at the CBO costings of this FTS plan:

SQL> SELECT * FROM TABLE(DBMS_XPLAN.display_cursor(sql_id=>'25qktyn35b662',format=>'ALLSTATS LAST +cost +bytes'));

PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
SQL_ID 25qktyn35b662, child number 0
-------------------------------------
select * from bowie2 where id between 1 and 4200

Plan hash value: 1495904576

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id | Operation                  | Name   | Starts | E-Rows |E-Bytes| Cost (%CPU)| A-Rows | A-Time     | Buffers |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|  0 | SELECT STATEMENT           |        |      1 |        |       |  1264 (100)|   4200 |00:00:00.02 |    4572 |
|* 1 |  TABLE ACCESS STORAGE FULL | BOWIE2 |      1 |   4200 |   684K|    1264 (1)|   4200 |00:00:00.02 |    4572 |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
---------------------------------------------------

   1 - storage(("ID"<=4200 AND "ID">=1))
       filter(("ID"<=4200 AND "ID">=1))

 

The cost of the FTS plan is 1264.

If we compare this is a plan that used the index:

SQL> select /*+ index (bowie2) */ * from bowie2 where id between 1 and 4200;

4,200 rows selected.

PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
SQL_ID bzm2vhchqpq7w, child number 0
-------------------------------------
select /*+ index (bowie2) */ * from bowie2 where id between 1 and 4200

Plan hash value: 3243780227

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id | Operation                            | Name        | Starts | E-Rows | A-Rows | A-Time     | Buffers |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|  0 | SELECT STATEMENT                     |             |      1 |        |   4200 |00:00:00.01 |    2665 |
|  1 |  TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID BATCHED | BOWIE2      |      1 |   4200 |   4200 |00:00:00.01 |    2665 |
|* 2 |   INDEX RANGE SCAN                   | BOWIE2_ID_I |      1 |   4200 |   4200 |00:00:00.01 |      21 |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
---------------------------------------------------

   2 - access("ID">=1 AND "ID"<=4200)

Note
-----
   - automatic DOP: Computed Degree of Parallelism is 1 because of no expensive parallel operation

Statistics
-----------------------------------------------------------
          2 CPU used by this session
          2 CPU used when call started
          2 DB time
      14531 RM usage
          3 Requests to/from client
          2 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
       2646 buffer is not pinned count
       5755 buffer is pinned count
        348 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
     462143 bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
          2 calls to get snapshot scn: kcmgss
          2 calls to kcmgcs
       2665 consistent gets
         2 consistent gets examination
         2 consistent gets examination (fastpath)
      2665 consistent gets from cache
      2663 consistent gets pin
      2663 consistent gets pin (fastpath)
         2 execute count
         1 index range scans
  21831680 logical read bytes from cache
      2663 no work - consistent read gets
        73 non-idle wait count
         2 opened cursors cumulative
         1 opened cursors current
         2 parse count (total)
         3 process last non-idle time
         2 session cursor cache count
      2665 session logical reads
         1 sorts (memory)
      2024 sorts (rows)
      4200 table fetch by rowid
         3 user calls

SQL> SELECT * FROM TABLE(DBMS_XPLAN.display_cursor(sql_id=>'bzm2vhchqpq7w',format=>'ALLSTATS LAST +cost +bytes'));

PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
SQL_ID bzm2vhchqpq7w, child number 0

-------------------------------------

select /*+ index (bowie2) */ * from bowie2 where id between 1 and 4200

Plan hash value: 3243780227

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id | Operation                            | Name        | Starts | E-Rows |E-Bytes| Cost (%CPU)| A-Rows | A-Time     | Buffers |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|  0 | SELECT STATEMENT                     |             |      1 |        |       |  2314 (100)|   4200 |00:00:00.01 |    2665 |
|  1 |  TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID BATCHED | BOWIE2      |      1 |   4200 |   684K|    2314 (1)|   4200 |00:00:00.01 |    2665 |
|* 2 |   INDEX RANGE SCAN                   | BOWIE2_ID_I |      1 |   4200 |       |      22 (0)|   4200 |00:00:00.01 |      21 |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Predicate Information (identified by operation id):

---------------------------------------------------

2 - access("ID">=1 AND "ID"<=4200)

 

The cost of using the index to retrieve the 4200 rows is 2310, more than the 1264 of the FTS.

 

For the vast majority of indexes, updating the ROWIDs for migrated rows will result in better performance, as such indexes will be able to directly access the correct new physical location of migrated rows, rather than having to visit the original table block and then follow the stored pointer to the new table block.

But for some very specific indexes, where data clustering is crucial, AND we have a significant number migrated rows, this might not necessarily be the case. The performance benefit might be minimal at best.

That’s more than enough for one post ūüôā

In my next post, I’ll discuss how to potentially remedy these performance implications, both for tables with or without ENABLE TABLE MOVEMENT enabled…

Costing Concatenated Indexes With Range Scan Predicates Part II (Coming Back To Life) July 27, 2022

Posted by Richard Foote in Automatic Indexing, CBO, Column Statistics, Concatenated Indexes, Explain Plan For Index, Full Table Scans, Index Access Path, Index Column Order, Index Column Reorder, Index Internals, Index statistics, Leaf Blocks, Non-Equality Predicates, Oracle, Oracle Blog, Oracle Cost Based Optimizer, Oracle General, Oracle Index Seminar, Oracle Indexes, Oracle Statistics, Performance Tuning, Richard Foote Training.
add a comment

In my previous Part I post, I discussed how the CBO basically stops the index leaf block access calculations after a non-equality predicate. This means that for an index with the leading indexed column being accessed via an unselective non-equality predicate, a large percentage of the index’s leaf blocks might need to be scanned, making the index access path unviable.

In the example in Part I, an index on the ID, CODE columns was too expensive due to the unselective range-scan predicate based on the leading ID column.

To provide the CBO a potentially much more efficient access path, we need an index with the more selective CODE predicate to be the leading column:

SQL> CREATE INDEX radiohead_code_id_i ON radiohead(code, id);

Index created.

SQL> SELECT index_name, blevel, leaf_blocks, clustering_factor

FROM user_indexes WHERE index_name = 'RADIOHEAD_CODE_ID_I';

INDEX_NAME                        BLEVEL LEAF_BLOCKS CLUSTERING_FACTOR
----------------------------- ---------- ----------- -----------------
RADIOHEAD_CODE_ID_I                    1         265             98619

If we now re-run the previous query:

SQL> SELECT * FROM radiohead WHERE id BETWEEN 1000 AND 5000 AND CODE = 140;

Execution Plan

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id  | Operation                           | Name                | Rows  | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT                    |                     |     4 |    72 |     6   (0)| 00:00:01 |
|   1 |  TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID BATCHED| RADIOHEAD           |     4 |    72 |     6   (0)| 00:00:01 |
|*  2 |   INDEX RANGE SCAN                  | RADIOHEAD_CODE_ID_I |     4 |       |     2   (0)| 00:00:01 |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Statistics
----------------------------------------------------------
          0  recursive calls
          0  db block gets
          7  consistent gets
          0  physical reads
          0  redo size
        806  bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
        608  bytes received via SQL*Net from client
          2  SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
          0  sorts (memory)
          0  sorts (disk)
          4  rows processed

We notice the CBO is now using this new index, as the costs for this index-based plan have dropped significantly, down to just 6 (from the previous 116). This overall cost of 6 is lower than the cost of 105 for the Full Table Scan and hence the reason why this index-based plan is now chosen by the CBO.

This is all due entirely to the significant drop in costs in accessing the index itself, now just 2 (from the previous 112).

Importantly, these much lower costs are accurate as we can tell via the reduced number of consistent reads, now just 7 (from 114 from the previous index-based plan).

If we now look at the associated costings:

Effective Index Selectivity = CODE selectivity x ID selectivity

= (1/10000) x ((5000-1000)/(10000-1) + 2 x (1/10000))

= 0.0001 x ((4000/9999) + 0.0002)

= 0.0001 x 0.40024)

= 0.000040024

Effective Table Selectivity = same as Index Selectivity

= 0.000040024

 

The effective index selectivity of 0.000040024 is now much lower than the previous (0.40024), as the CBO can now consider the product of the selectivities of both columns).

If we now plug this improved effective index selectivity into the index path costing calculations:

Index IO Cost = blevel +

ceil(effective index selectivity x leaf_blocks) +

ceil(effective table selectivity x clustering_factor)

 

Index IO Cost = 1  +  ceil(0.000040024 x 265) + ceil(0.000040024 x 99034)

= 1 + 1  + 4

= 2 + 4

= 6

Index Access Cost  = IO Costs + CPU Costs (in this plan, 0% of total costs and so unchanged from the IO costs)

= 2 + 4

= 6

We can see how the respective 2 and 6 improved CBO index costings are derived.

So again, it’s important to note that Automatic Indexing is doing entirely the correct thing with these examples, when it creates an index with the equality based predicate columns as the leading columns of the index…

Costing Concatenated Indexes With Range Scan Predicates Part I (Nothing To Be Desired) July 22, 2022

Posted by Richard Foote in BLEVEL, CBO, Clustering Factor, Concatenated Indexes, Index Access Path, Index Column Order, Index Column Reorder, Leaf Blocks, Non-Equality Predicates, Oracle, Oracle Cost Based Optimizer, Oracle General, Oracle Indexes, Performance Tuning, Richard Foote Consulting, Richard Foote Training, Richard's Blog.
1 comment so far

In my previous post, I discussed how Automatic Indexing ordered columns when derived from SQLs containing both equality and non-equality predicates.

I’ve since had offline questions asking why indexes are more effective with leading columns addressing the equality predicates rather than the leading columns addressing non-equality predicates. Based on the theory that for everyone who asks a question, there are likely numerous others wondering the same thing, I thought I’ll try to explain things with these posts.

I’ll start by creating the following simple table that has two columns (ID and CODE) that are both highly selective (they both have 10,000 distinct values in a 100,000 rows table, so 10 rows approximately per value):

SQL> CREATE TABLE radiohead (id NUMBER, code NUMBER, name VARCHAR2(42));

Table created.

SQL> INSERT INTO radiohead SELECT mod(rownum,10000)+1,

ceil(dbms_random.value(0,10000)), 'RADIOHEAD' FROM dual CONNECT BY LEVEL <= 100000;

100000 rows created.

SQL> commit;

Commit complete.

I’ll next create an index based on the ID, CODE columns, with importantly the ID column as the leading column:

SQL> CREATE INDEX radiohead_id_code_i ON radiohead(id, code);

Index created.

SQL> exec dbms_stats.gather_table_stats(ownname=>null, tabname=>'RADIOHEAD',

estimate_percent=> null, method_opt=> 'FOR ALL COLUMNS SIZE 1');

PL/SQL procedure successfully completed.

 

When it comes to costing index accesses, some of the crucial statistics including the Blevel, Leaf_Blocks and often most crucial of all, the Clustering_Factor:

SQL> SELECT index_name, blevel, leaf_blocks, clustering_factor FROM user_indexes WHERE index_name = 'RADIOHEAD_ID_CODE_I';

INDEX_NAME               BLEVEL LEAF_BLOCKS CLUSTERING_FACTOR
-------------------- ---------- ----------- -----------------
RADIOHEAD_ID_CODE_I           1         265             99034

 

We begin by running the following query, with an equality predicate on the ID column and a relatively large, non-selective range predicate on the CODE column:

SQL> SELECT * FROM radiohead WHERE id = 42 AND CODE BETWEEN 1000 AND 5000;

Execution Plan
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id  | Operation                           | Name                | Rows  | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT                    |                     |     4 |    72 |     6   (0)| 00:00:01 |
|   1 |  TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID BATCHED| RADIOHEAD           |     4 |    72 |     6   (0)| 00:00:01 |
|*  2 |   INDEX RANGE SCAN                  | RADIOHEAD_ID_CODE_I |     4 |       |     2   (0)| 00:00:01 |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Statistics
----------------------------------------------------------
          0  recursive calls
          0  db block gets
          8  consistent gets
          0  physical reads
          0  redo size
        824  bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
        608  bytes received via SQL*Net from client
          2  SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
          0  sorts (memory)
          0  sorts (disk)
          5  rows processed

As (perhaps) expected, the CBO uses the index to retrieve the small number of rows (just 5 rows).

However, if we run the following query which also returns a small number of rows  (just 4 rows) BUT with the relatively unselective, non-equality predicate based on the leading indexed ID column:

SQL> SELECT * FROM radiohead WHERE id BETWEEN 1000 AND 5000 AND CODE = 140;

Execution Plan
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id  | Operation         | Name      | Rows  | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT  |           |     4 |    72 |   105  (11)| 00:00:01 |
|*  1 |  TABLE ACCESS FULL| RADIOHEAD |     4 |    72 |   105  (11)| 00:00:01 |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Statistics
----------------------------------------------------------
          0  recursive calls
          0  db block gets
        363  consistent gets
          0  physical reads
          0  redo size
        770  bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
        608  bytes received via SQL*Net from client
          2  SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
          0  sorts (memory)
          0  sorts (disk)
          4  rows processed

We notice (perhaps unexpectedly) that the CBO now ignores the index and uses a Full Table Scan, even though only 4 rows are returned from a 100,000 row table.

This is a common area of confusion. Why does Oracle not use the index when both columns in the index are referenced in the SQL predicates and only a tiny number of rows are returned?

The answer comes down to the very unselective non-equality predicate (ID BETWEEN 1000 AND 5000) being serviced by the leading column (ID) of the index.

The “ID BETWEEN 1000 AND 5000” predicate basically covers 40% of all known ID values, which means Oracle must now read 40% of all Leaf Blocks within the index (one leaf block at a time), starting with ID =1000 and ending with ID = 5000. Although there are very few rows that then subsequently match up with the other (CODE = 140) predicate based on the second column (CODE) of the index, these relatively few values could exist anywhere within the 40% ID range.

Therefore, when costing the reading of the actual index, the CBO basically stops its calculations after the non-equality predicate on this leading ID column and indeed estimates that a full 40% of the index itself must be scanned.

If we force the CBO into a range scan via a basic index hint:

SQL> SELECT /*+ index(r) */ * FROM radiohead r WHERE id BETWEEN 1000 AND 5000 AND CODE = 140;

Execution Plan
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id  | Operation                           | Name                | Rows  | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT                    |                     |     4 |    72 |   116   (4)| 00:00:01 |
|   1 |  TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID BATCHED| RADIOHEAD           |     4 |    72 |   116   (4)| 00:00:01 |
|*  2 |   INDEX RANGE SCAN                  | RADIOHEAD_ID_CODE_I |     4 |       |   112   (4)| 00:00:01 |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Statistics
----------------------------------------------------------
          0  recursive calls
          0  db block gets
        114  consistent gets
          0  physical reads
          0  redo size
        806  bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
        608  bytes received via SQL*Net from client
          2  SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
          0  sorts (memory)
          0  sorts (disk)
          4  rows processed

We notice that the overall cost of this index based plan is 116, greater than the 105 cost of the Full Table Scan (and hence why the Full Table Scan was selected). We also notice that the vast majority of this 116 cost can be attributed to the index scan itself in the plan, which has a cost of 112.

If you have a calculator handy, this is basically how these costs are derived.

Range Selectivity = (Max Range Value‚ÄďMin Range Value)/(Max Column Value‚ÄďMin Column Value)

Effective Index Selectivity = Range Selectivity + 2 x ID density (as a BETWEEN clause was used which is inclusive of Min/Max range)

= (5000-1000)/(10000-1) + 2 x (1/10000)

= 0.40004 + 0.0002

= 0.40024

Effective Table Selectivity = ID selectivity (as above) x CODE selectivity

= 0.40024 x (1/10000)

= 0.40024 x 0.0001

= 0.000040024

These selectivities are then inserted into the following index costing formula:

Index IO Cost = blevel +

ceil(effective index selectivity x leaf_blocks) +

ceil(effective table selectivity x clustering_factor)

 

Index IO Cost = 1  +  ceil(0.40024 x 265) + ceil(0.000040024 x 99034)

= 1 + 107 + 4

= 108 + 4 = 112.

 

Index Access Cost = IO Costs + CPU Costs (in this plan, 4% of total costs)

= (108 + (112 x 0.04)) + (4 + (4 x 0.04))

= (108 + 4) + (4 + 0)

= 112 + 4

= 116

 

So we can clearly see how the CBO has made its calculations, come up with its costs and has decided that the Full Table Scan is indeed the cheaper alternative with the current index in place.

So Automatic Indexing is doing the right thing, by creating an index with the leading column based on the equality predicate and the second indexed column based on the unselective non-equality predicate.

I’ll expand on this point in an upcoming Part II post.

Automatic Indexing 21c: Non-Equality Predicate Anomaly (“Strangers When We Meet”) July 14, 2022

Posted by Richard Foote in 21c New Features, Automatic Indexing, Autonomous Database, Autonomous Transaction Processing, CBO, Exadata, Exadata X8, Full Table Scans, Index Column Order, Invisible Indexes, Non-Equality Predicates, Oracle, Oracle 21c, Oracle Blog, Oracle Cloud, Oracle Cost Based Optimizer, Oracle Indexes, Performance Tuning, Richard Foote Training, Richard's Blog.
3 comments

I’m currently putting together some Exadata related training for a couple of customers and came across a rather strange anomaly with regard the status of Automatic Indexes, when created in part on unselective, non-equality predicates.

As discussed previously, Oracle Database 21c now allows the creation of Automatic Indexes based on non-equality predicates (previously, Automatic Indexes were only created on equality-based predicates).

But one appears to get rather odd resultant Automatic Indexes in the scenario where the non-equality predicate is not particularly selective but other predicates are highly selective.

To illustrate, I’ll create a basic table that has two columns (ID and CODE) that are both highly selective:

SQL> create table ziggy_new (id number, code number, name varchar2(42));

Table created.

SQL> insert into ziggy_new select rownum, mod(rownum, 1000000)+1, 'David Bowie' from dual connect by level <= 10000000;

10000000 rows created.

SQL> commit;

Commit complete.

SQL> exec dbms_stats.gather_table_stats(ownname=>null, tabname=>'ZIGGY_NEW');

PL/SQL procedure successfully completed.

So there are currently no indexes on this table.

I’ll next run the following SQL (and others similar) a number of times:

SQL> select * from ziggy_new where code=42 and id between 1 and 100000;

Execution Plan
----------------------------------------------------------
Plan hash value: 3165184525

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id  | Operation                  | Name      | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU) | Time     |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT           |           |    1 |    23 |    6738 (2) | 00:00:01 |
| * 1 |  TABLE ACCESS STORAGE FULL | ZIGGY_NEW |    1 |    23 |    6738 (2) | 00:00:01 |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
---------------------------------------------------

   1 - storage("CODE"=42 AND "ID"<=100000 AND "ID">=1)
       filter("CODE"=42 AND "ID"<=100000 AND "ID">=1)

Statistics
----------------------------------------------------------
          0 recursive calls
          0 db block gets
      38605 consistent gets
      38600 physical reads
          0 redo size
        725 bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
         52 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
          2 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
          0 sorts (memory)
          0 sorts (disk)
          1 rows processed

Without any indexes, the CBO currently has no choice but to use a Full Table Scan.

But only 1 row is returned. The first equality predicate on the CODE column is highly selective and on its own would only return 10 rows out of the 10M row table. The second, non-equality range-based predicate on the ID column is nowhere near as selective and offers limited additional filtering.

The CBO stops calculating index related costs after a non-equality predicate column (as subsequent column values could exist anywhere within the preceding range), and so the more effective index here is one based on (CODE, ID) with the non-equality predicate column second,  or potentially just on the CODE column only, as the ID range offers minimal filtering benefits.

So what does Automatic Indexing make of things?

If we look at the subsequent Automatic Indexing report:

SUMMARY (AUTO INDEXES)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Index candidates                             : 3
Indexes created (visible / invisible)        : 1 (0 / 1)
Space used (visible / invisible)             : 209.72 MB (0 B / 209.72 MB)
Indexes dropped                              : 0
SQL statements verified                      : 44
SQL statements improved (improvement factor) : 12 (64.7x)
SQL plan baselines created                   : 0
Overall improvement factor                   : 1.6x
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY (MANUAL INDEXES)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unused indexes   : 0
Space used       : 0 B
Unusable indexes : 0
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

INDEX DETAILS
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following indexes were created:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Owner | Table     | Index                | Key     | Type   | Properties |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| BOWIE | ZIGGY_NEW | SYS_AI_75j16xff1ag3j | CODE,ID | B-TREE | NONE       |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

So Automatic Indexing has indeed created an index based on CODE,ID (a common Automatic Indexing trait appears to be to create an index based on all available predicates).

BUT the index is created as an INVISIBLE Index and so can not generally be used by database sessions.

SQL> select index_name, auto, visibility, status, num_rows, leaf_blocks, clustering_factor
from user_indexes where table_name='ZIGGY_NEW';

INDEX_NAME                     AUT VISIBILIT STATUS     NUM_ROWS LEAF_BLOCKS CLUSTERING_FACTOR
------------------------------ --- --------- -------- ---------- ----------- -----------------
SYS_AI_75j16xff1ag3j           YES INVISIBLE VALID      10000000       25123          10000000

SQL> select index_name, column_name, column_position
     from user_ind_columns where table_name='ZIGGY_NEW';

INDEX_NAME                     COLUMN_NAME  COLUMN_POSITION
------------------------------ ------------ ---------------
SYS_AI_75j16xff1ag3j           CODE                       1
SYS_AI_75j16xff1ag3j           ID                         2

 

So re-running the previous SQL statements continues to use a Full Table Scan:

SQL> select * from ziggy_new where code=42 and id between 1 and 100000;

Execution Plan
----------------------------------------------------------
Plan hash value: 3165184525

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|  Id | Operation                  | Name      | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU) | Time     |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT           |           |    1 |    23 |    6738 (2) | 00:00:01 |
| * 1 |  TABLE ACCESS STORAGE FULL | ZIGGY_NEW |    1 |    23 |    6738 (2) | 00:00:01 |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
---------------------------------------------------

   1 - storage("CODE"=42 AND "ID"<=100000 AND "ID">=1)
       filter("CODE"=42 AND "ID"<=100000 AND "ID">=1)

Statistics
----------------------------------------------------------
          0 recursive calls
          0 db block gets
      38605 consistent gets
      38600 physical reads
          0 redo size
        725 bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
         52 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
          2 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
          0 sorts (memory)
          0 sorts (disk)
          1 rows processed

 

Automatic Indexing appears to only create Invisible indexes when there is an inefficient non-equality predicate present. It won’t create the index as a Visible index, even though it would significantly benefit these SQL statements that caused its creation. And Automatic Indexing won’t create an index on just the highly selective CODE equality predicate, which would also be of much benefit to these SQL statements.

If we now run similar queries, but with much more selective non-equality predicates, such as:

SQL> select * from ziggy_new where code=1 and id between 1 and 10;

no rows selected

Execution Plan
----------------------------------------------------------
Plan hash value: 3165184525

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|  Id | Operation                  | Name      | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU) | Time     |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT           |           |    1 |    23 |    6738 (2) | 00:00:01 |
| * 1 |  TABLE ACCESS STORAGE FULL | ZIGGY_NEW |    1 |    23 |    6738 (2) | 00:00:01 |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
---------------------------------------------------

   1 - storage("CODE"=1 AND "ID"<=10 AND "ID">=1)
       filter("CODE"=1 AND "ID"<=10 AND "ID">=1)

Statistics
----------------------------------------------------------
          0 recursive calls
          0 db block gets
      38604 consistent gets
      38600 physical reads
          0 redo size
        503 bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
         41 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
          1 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
          0 sorts (memory)
          0 sorts (disk)
          0 rows processed

Again, with no (Visible) index present, the CBO currently has no choice but to use the Full Table Scan.

But during the next cycle, after Automatic Indexing kicks in again:

SUMMARY (AUTO INDEXES)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Index candidates                             : 5
Indexes created (visible / invisible)        : 1 (1 / 0)
Space used (visible / invisible)             : 209.72 MB (209.72 MB / 0 B)
Indexes dropped                              : 0
SQL statements verified                      : 89
SQL statements improved (improvement factor) : 31 (71.9x)
SQL plan baselines created                   : 0
Overall improvement factor                   : 1.7x
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY (MANUAL INDEXES)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unused indexes   : 0
Space used       : 0 B
Unusable indexes : 0
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

INDEX DETAILS
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following indexes were created:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Owner | Table     | Index                | Key     | Type   | Properties |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| BOWIE | ZIGGY_NEW | SYS_AI_75j16xff1ag3j | CODE,ID | B-TREE | NONE       |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

VERIFICATION DETAILS
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The performance of the following statements improved:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parsing Schema Name : BOWIE
SQL ID              : d4znwcu4h52ca
SQL Text            : select * from ziggy_new where code=42 and id between 1 and 10
Improvement Factor  : 38604x

Execution Statistics:
-----------------------------
                    Original Plan                Auto Index Plan
                    ---------------------------- ----------------------------
Elapsed Time (s):   3398605                      68
CPU Time (s):       3166824                      68
Buffer Gets:        463250                       3
Optimizer Cost:     6738                         4
Disk Reads:         463200                       0
Direct Writes:      0                            0
Rows Processed:     0                            0
Executions:         12                           1

PLANS SECTION
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------

- Original
-----------------------------
Plan Hash Value : 3165184525

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id | Operation                  | Name      | Rows | Bytes | Cost | Time     |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|  0 | SELECT STATEMENT           |           |      |       | 6738 |          |
|  1 |  TABLE ACCESS STORAGE FULL | ZIGGY_NEW |    1 |    23 | 6738 | 00:00:01 |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

- With Auto Indexes
-----------------------------
Plan Hash Value : 1514586396

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|  Id | Operation                            | Name                 | Rows | Bytes | Cost | Time     |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT                     |                      |    1 |    23 |    4 | 00:00:01 |
|   1 |  TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID BATCHED | ZIGGY_NEW            |    1 |    23 |    4 | 00:00:01 |
| * 2 |   INDEX RANGE SCAN                   | SYS_AI_75j16xff1ag3j |    1 |       |    3 | 00:00:01 |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
------------------------------------------
* 2 - access("CODE"=42 AND "ID">=1 AND "ID"<=10)

Notes
-----
- Dynamic sampling used for this statement ( level = 11 )

 

But this time, the index on the CODE,ID columns is created as a Visible index.

INDEX_NAME                     AUT VISIBILIT STATUS     NUM_ROWS LEAF_BLOCKS CLUSTERING_FACTOR
------------------------------ --- --------- -------- ---------- ----------- -----------------
SYS_AI_75j16xff1ag3j           YES VISIBLE   VALID      10000000       25123          10000000

SQL> select index_name, column_name, column_position from user_ind_columns where table_name='ZIGGY_NEW';

INDEX_NAME                     COLUMN_NAME  COLUMN_POSITION
------------------------------ ------------ ---------------
SYS_AI_75j16xff1ag3j           CODE                       1
SYS_AI_75j16xff1ag3j           ID                         2

So this index can be generally used, both by the newer SQLs that generated the now Visible index:

SQL> select * from ziggy_new where code=42 and id between 1 and 10;

no rows selected

Execution Plan
----------------------------------------------------------
Plan hash value: 1514586396

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id | Operation                            | Name                 | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU) | Time     |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|  0 | SELECT STATEMENT                     |                      |    1 |    23 |       4 (0) | 00:00:01 |
|  1 |  TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID BATCHED | ZIGGY_NEW            |    1 |    23 |       4 (0) | 00:00:01 |
|* 2 |   INDEX RANGE SCAN                   | SYS_AI_75j16xff1ag3j |    1 |       |       3 (0) | 00:00:01 |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
---------------------------------------------------

   2 - access("CODE"=42 AND "ID">=1 AND "ID"<=10)

Statistics
----------------------------------------------------------
          0 recursive calls
          0 db block gets
          3 consistent gets
          0 physical reads
          0 redo size
        503 bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
         41 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
          1 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
          0 sorts (memory)
          0 sorts (disk)
          0 rows processed

And also used by the SQLs with the unselective non-equality predicates, that Automatic Indexing would only create as Invisible indexes:

SQL> select * from ziggy_new where code=42 and id between 1 and 100000;

Execution Plan
----------------------------------------------------------
Plan hash value: 1514586396

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id | Operation                            | Name                 | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU) | Time     |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|  0 | SELECT STATEMENT                     |                      |    1 |    23 |       4 (0) | 00:00:01 |
|  1 |  TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID BATCHED | ZIGGY_NEW            |    1 |    23 |       4 (0) | 00:00:01 |
|* 2 |   INDEX RANGE SCAN                   | SYS_AI_75j16xff1ag3j |    1 |       |       3 (0) | 00:00:01 |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
---------------------------------------------------

   2 - access("CODE"=42 AND "ID">=1 AND "ID"<=100000)

Statistics
----------------------------------------------------------
          0 recursive calls
          0 db block gets
          5 consistent gets
          0 physical reads
          0 redo size
        729 bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
         52 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
          2 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
          0 sorts (memory)
          0 sorts (disk)
          1 rows processed

 

Automatic Indexing appears to currently not quite do the right thing with SQL statements that have unselective non-equality predicates, by creating such indexes as only Invisible Indexes, inclusive of the unselective columns.

Although an edge case, I would recommend looking through the list of created Automatic Indexes to see if any such Invisible/Valid indexes exists, as it can suggest there are current inefficient SQL statements that could benefit from such indexes being Visible.

Upcoming Webinar Series Now Sold Out!! (“White Light White Heat”) July 13, 2022

Posted by Richard Foote in Richard Foote Consulting, Richard Foote Seminars, Richard Foote Training.
add a comment

My upcoming webinars now have the maximum number of attendees I’m comfortable in having in one session and are now officially sold out!!

Taking my inspiration from David Bowie’s famous 1973 farewell speech, not only is this the last webinar series of the year, but it’s likely the last webinar series I’ll ever do.

A huge thank you to everyone who has enrolled, I’m absolutely sure we’re all going to have a blast ūüôā

If you were interested in attending this training, please contact me to get yourself on a waiting list (although I unfortunately have no timeframe in which I’m likely to run another series) : richard@richardfooteconsulting.com.

Announcement: Registration Links For Upcoming Webinars Now Open (“Join The Gang”) May 25, 2022

Posted by Richard Foote in 18c New Features, 19c New Features, 21c New Features, Index Internals, Index Internals Seminar, Indexing Tricks, Oracle 21c, Oracle General, Oracle Index Seminar, Oracle Indexing Internals Webinar, Oracle Performance Diagnostics and Tuning Seminar, Oracle Performance Diagnostics and Tuning Webinar, Oracle19c, Performance Tuning, Performance Tuning Seminar, Performance Tuning Webinar, Richard Foote Consulting, Richard Foote Seminars, Richard Foote Training, Richard Presentations.
add a comment

The registration links for my upcoming webinars running in August are now open!!!

The price of each webinar is $1,600 AUD. There is a special price of $2,750 AUD if you wish to attend both webinars (just use the Special Combo Price button).

(Note: Do NOT use the links if you’re an Australian resident. Please contact me at richard@richardfooteconsulting.com for additional payment info and tax invoice that includes additional GST).

Just click the below “Buy Now” buttons to book your place for these unique, highly acclaimed Oracle training events (see some of my testimonials for feedback by previous attendees to these training events):

 

Oracle Indexing Internals Webinar: 8-12 August 2022 (between 09:00 GMT and 13:00 GMT daily) – $1,600 AUD: SOLD OUT!!

Oracle Performance Diagnostics and Tuning Webinar: 22-25 August 2022 (between 09:00 GMT and 13:00 GMT daily) – $1,600 AUD: SOLD OUT!!

Special Combo Price for both August 2022 Webinars$2,750 AUD: SOLD OUT!!

 

The links allow you to book a place using either PayPal or a credit card. If you wish to pay via a different method or have any questions at all regarding these events, please contact me at richard@richardfooteconsulting.com.

As I mentioned previously, for those of you on my official waiting list, I will reserve a place for you for a limited time.

As this will probably be the last time I will run these events, remaining places are likely to go quickly. So please book your place ASAP to avoid disappointment…

 

Read below a brief synopsis of each webinar:

“Oracle Indexing Internals“

This is a must attend webinar of benefit to not only DBAs, but also to Developers, Solution Architects and anyone else interested in designing, developing or maintaining high performance Oracle-based applications. It’s a fun, but intense, content rich webinar that is suitable for people of all experiences (from beginners to seasoned Oracle experts).

Indexes are fundamental to every Oracle database and are crucial for optimal performance. However, there’s an incredible amount of misconception, misunderstanding and pure myth regarding how Oracle indexes function and should be maintained. Many applications and databases are suboptimal and run inefficiently primarily because an inappropriate indexing strategy has been implemented.

This webinar examines most available Oracle index structures/options and discusses in considerable detail how indexes function, how/when they should be used and how they should be maintained. A key component of the webinar is how indexes are costed and evaluated by the Cost Based Optimizer (CBO) and how appropriate data management practices are vital for an effective indexing strategy. It also covers many useful tips and strategies to maximise the benefits of indexes on application/database performance and scalability, as well as in maximising Oracle database investments. Much of the material is exclusive to this webinar and is not generally available in Oracle documentation or in Oracle University courses.

For full details, see: https://richardfooteconsulting.com/indexing-seminar/

 

“Oracle Performance Diagnostics and Tuning“

This is a must attend webinar aimed at Oracle professionals (both DBAs and Developers) who are interested in Performance Tuning.  The webinar details how to maximise the performance of both Oracle databases and associated applications and how to diagnose and address any performance issues as quickly and effectively as possible.

When an application suddenly runs ‚Äúslow‚ÄĚ or when people start complaining about the ‚Äúpoor performance‚ÄĚ of the database, there‚Äôs often some uncertainty in how to most quickly and most accurately determine the ‚Äúroot‚ÄĚ cause of any such slowdown and effectively address any associated issues. In this seminar, we explore a Tuning Methodology that helps Oracle professionals to both quickly and reliably determine the actual causes of performance issues and so ensure the effectiveness of any applied resolutions.

Looking at a number of real world scenarios and numerous actual examples and test cases, this webinar will show participants how to confidently and reliably diagnose performance issues. The webinar explores in much detail the various diagnostics tools and reports available in Oracle to assist in determining any database performance issue and importantly WHEN and HOW to effectively use each approach. Additionally, participants are also invited to share their own database/SQL reports, where we can apply the principles learnt in diagnosing the performance of their actual databases/applications.

One of the more common reasons for poor Oracle performance is inefficient or poorly running SQL. This seminar explores in much detail how SQL is executed within the Oracle database, the various issues and related concepts important in understanding why SQL might be inefficient and the many capabilities and features Oracle has in helping to both resolve SQL performance issues and to maintain the stability and reliability of SQL execution.

It’s a fun, but intense, content rich webinar that is suitable for people of all experiences (from beginners to seasoned Oracle experts).

For full details, see: https://richardfooteconsulting.com/performance-tuning-seminar/

 

If you have any questions about these events, please contact me at richard@richardfooteconsulting.com

 

Announcement: New (And Likely Final) Dates For My Webinars Finalised Next Week !! May 12, 2022

Posted by Richard Foote in 19c, 19c New Features, 21c New Features, Indexing Webinar, Oracle, Oracle 21c, Oracle Cloud, Oracle General, Oracle Performance Diagnostics and Tuning Webinar, Richard Foote Training.
add a comment

 

It’s been one hell of a hectic year!!

For all those of you who have been patiently hanging on for the next series of my webinars, I finally, at long last, have some good news.

I’m currently just finalising my calendar for the upcoming months, but I shall announce the next running of my webinars next week.

I plan to run both of my webinars in the coming months (follow links for full details on each webinar):

 

Note: There is the very distinct possibility that I will be running these highly acclaimed training events, either as a webinar or in person as a seminar, for the very last time.

Ever!!

So these will indeed be unique opportunities to attend some quality training on how to improve the performance and scalability of both your Oracle based applications and backend Oracle databases.

Listen out next week for full details on when these webinars will finally be available to attend and how to register for the limited places available ūüôā