-
Remember the Golden Rule - He who has the gold makes the rules!
===================
Kris109
Ph.D., OCP 8i, 9i, 10g, 11g DBA
-
Well I am still waiting if somebody could please help me.
Thanks.
-
-
I request somebody to help me please.
Thanks.
-
Given the complexity of the query, view definition and the number of rows, 65 seconds does not seem to be too bad. However, if you want to improve the performance, you need to do some homework.
1. Run the query directly against the tables. Since you are using inline view for your view definition, you just have to add the where clauses there. Run explain plan to see whether there is improvement.
2. You have to play around with the join order. Use the most restrictive join condition first. This is true for both query and the view definition. Again, run explain plan to measure the performance.
3. Tune your indexes. Obviously you need indexes on columns(t1. trans_no, s1.acct_id etc). Again, you can play around and see whether an index actually improves query response or makes it worse.
Remember the Golden Rule - He who has the gold makes the rules!
===================
Kris109
Ph.D., OCP 8i, 9i, 10g, 11g DBA
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
Click Here to Expand Forum to Full Width
|