赞
踩
作者:胡呈清,爱可生 DBA 团队成员,擅于故障分析、性能优化。
数据库版本:OceanBase V3.2.3
本文借助一个案例,来了解 not in 对 NULL 值敏感的处理逻辑,并探讨相应的优化方法。
前不久,我遇到了一个慢SQL的case,在这段SQL中,原本的NOT IN子查询被优化器改写成了NESTED-LOOP ANTI JOIN,然而,由于被驱动表的全表扫描无法用索引,导致执行耗时达16秒。具体的SQL语句如下:
- SELECT AGENT_ID, MAX(REL_AGENT_ID)
- FROM T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL
- WHERE AGENT_ID NOT IN (select AGENT_ID
- from T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL
- where valid_flg = '1')
- group by AGENT_ID;
简略执行计划如下:
- ==============================================================================================
- |ID|OPERATOR |NAME |EST. ROWS|COST |
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- |0 |MERGE GROUP BY | |146 |62970523|
- |1 | NESTED-LOOP ANTI JOIN| |149 |62970511|
- |2 | TABLE SCAN |T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL(I_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL_AGENT_ID)|27760 |10738 |
- |3 | MATERIAL | |13880 |11313 |
- |4 | SUBPLAN SCAN |VIEW1 |13880 |11115 |
- |5 | TABLE SCAN |T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL |13880 |10906 |
- ==============================================================================================
表结构如下,关联字段 AGENT_ID
是有索引的:
- CREATE TABLE "T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL" (
- "REL_AGENT_ID" NUMBER(22) CONSTRAINT "T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL_OBNOTNULL_1679987669730612" NOT NULL ENABLE,
- "AGENT_ID" NUMBER(22),
- "EMPLOYEE_ID" NUMBER(22),
- "EMP_PARTY_FULLNAME" VARCHAR2(60),
- "GRP_ID" NUMBER(22),
- "GRP_PARTY_FULLNAME" VARCHAR2(255),
- "CS_ID" NUMBER(22),
- "CS_ORGAN_NAME" VARCHAR2(255),
- "CRT_DTTM" DATE,
- "LASTUPT_DTTM" DATE,
- "VALID_FLG" VARCHAR2(1),
- "VALID_DTTM" DATE,
- "INVALID_DTTM" DATE,
- CONSTRAINT "PK_T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL" PRIMARY KEY ("REL_AGENT_ID")
- );
- CREATE INDEX "IDX_T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL_CT" on "T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL" ("CRT_DTTM") GLOBAL ;
- CREATE INDEX "IDX_T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL_LT" on "T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL" ("LASTUPT_DTTM") GLOBAL ;
- CREATE INDEX "I_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL_AGENT_ID" on "T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL" ("AGENT_ID") GLOBAL ;
![](https://csdnimg.cn/release/blogv2/dist/pc/img/newCodeMoreWhite.png)
数据量:T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL
表一共 2.7 万行,子查询结果 3900 行。
从执行计划、表结构和数据量来看,这个 SQL 效率低有两个原因:
AGENT_ID
有索引,但对被驱动表做查询时却使用全表扫描,效率必定低。为什么不走索引?问题得一个一个看,先分析第二个问题。
使用如下 HINT 都不生效(并且尝试了 Outline Data 中的写法):
- /*+ use_hash(A B)*/
- /*+ USE_HASH(@"SEL$1" ("VIEW1"@"SEL$1" )) */
- /*+ NO_USE_NL_AGGREGATION */
执行计划显示 Used Hint 部分都为空,说明 HINT 无法生效,原因未知:
- Used Hint:
- -------------------------------------
- /*+
- */
- Outline Data:
- -------------------------------------
- /*+
- BEGIN_OUTLINE_DATA
- NO_USE_HASH_AGGREGATION(@"SEL$1")
- LEADING(@"SEL$1" ("REPORT.A"@"SEL$1" "VIEW1"@"SEL$1" ))
- USE_NL(@"SEL$1" ("VIEW1"@"SEL$1" ))
- PQ_DISTRIBUTE(@"SEL$1" ("VIEW1"@"SEL$1" ) LOCAL LOCAL)
- USE_NL_MATERIALIZATION(@"SEL$1" ("VIEW1"@"SEL$1" ))
- INDEX(@"SEL$1" "REPORT.A"@"SEL$1" "I_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL_AGENT_ID")
- FULL(@"SEL$2" "REPORT.B"@"SEL$2")
- END_OUTLINE_DATA
- */
![](https://csdnimg.cn/release/blogv2/dist/pc/img/newCodeMoreWhite.png)
Tips:当 OB 上看到的执行计划不符合预期,但又找不到原因时,可以对比 Oracle 的执行计划。
Oracle 上执行计划如下(这里得用 set autotrace on
的方式查看真实执行计划):
直接搜索就可以得到大概的解释 NA 即 Null-Aware Anti Join,这种反连接能够处理 NULL 值。啥意思?下面展开讲讲。
- SQL> set autotrace on
- SQL> SELECT AGENT_ID, MAX(REL_AGENT_ID)
- FROM T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL
- WHERE AGENT_ID NOT IN (select AGENT_ID
- from T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL
- where valid_flg = '1')
- group by AGENT_ID; 2 3 4 5 6
-
- no rows selected
-
- Execution Plan
- ----------------------------------------------------------
- Plan hash value: 1033962367
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- | Id | Operation | Name | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time |
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- | 0 | SELECT STATEMENT | | 9 | 171 | 276 (2)| 00:00:04 |
- | 1 | HASH GROUP BY | | 9 | 171 | 276 (2)| 00:00:04 |
- |* 2 | HASH JOIN RIGHT ANTI NA| | 9672 | 179K| 275 (2)| 00:00:04 |
- |* 3 | TABLE ACCESS FULL | T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL | 3886 | 31088 | 137 (1)| 00:00:02 |
- | 4 | TABLE ACCESS FULL | T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL | 28098 | 301K| 137 (1)| 00:00:02 |
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
- Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
- ---------------------------------------------------
- 2 - access("AGENT_ID"="AGENT_ID")
- 3 - filter("VALID_FLG"='1')
![](https://csdnimg.cn/release/blogv2/dist/pc/img/newCodeMoreWhite.png)
为了更好的说明 NULL 值对 NOT IN 的影响,下面举个简单的例子:
- create table t1(a number,b varchar2(50),c varchar2(50) not null);
- insert into t1 values(1,'aaa','aaa'),(2,'bbb','bbb'),(3,'ccc','ccc'),(4,NULL,'ddd');
- commit;
只要 NOT IN 后面的子查询或者常量集合一旦有 NULL 值出现,则整个 SQL 的执行结果就会为 NULL:
- obclient [TESTUSER]> select * from t1 where b not in('aaa',NULL);
- Empty set (0.004 sec)
-
- obclient [TESTUSER]> select tt.b from t1 tt where tt.a=4;
- +------+
- | B |
- +------+
- | NULL |
- +------+
- 1 row in set (0.007 sec)
-
- obclient [TESTUSER]> select t.* from t1 t where b not in(select tt.b from t1 tt where tt.a=4);
- Empty set (0.005 sec)
NOT EXISTS 对 NULL 值不敏感,这意味着 NULL 值对 NOT EXISTS 的执行结果不会有什么影响:
- obclient [TESTUSER]> select t.* from t1 t where not EXISTS (select tt.b from t1 tt where t.b=tt.b and tt.a=4);
- +------+------+-----+
- | A | B | C |
- +------+------+-----+
- | 1 | aaa | aaa |
- | 2 | bbb | bbb |
- | 3 | ccc | ccc |
- | 4 | NULL | ddd |
- +------+------+-----+
- 4 rows in set (0.005 sec)
IN 对 NULL 值也不敏感:
- obclient [TESTUSER]> select * from t1 where b in('aaa',NULL);
- +------+------+-----+
- | A | B | C |
- +------+------+-----+
- | 1 | aaa | aaa |
- +------+------+-----+
- 1 row in set (0.004 sec)
-
- obclient [TESTUSER]> select t.* from t1 t where b in(select tt.b from t1 tt where tt.a<5);
- +------+------+-----+
- | A | B | C |
- +------+------+-----+
- | 1 | aaa | aaa |
- | 2 | bbb | bbb |
- | 3 | ccc | ccc |
- +------+------+-----+
- 3 rows in set (0.002 sec)
![](https://csdnimg.cn/release/blogv2/dist/pc/img/newCodeMoreWhite.png)
结合 Null-Aware Anti Join,我们可以得到如下结论:
NOT IN 和 <>ALL 对 NULL 值敏感,这意味着 NOT IN 后面的子查询或者常量集合一旦有 NULL 值出现,则整个 SQL 的执行结果就会为 NULL。
所以一旦相关的连接列上出现了 NULL 值(实际只会判断字段是否有 NOT NULL 约束),此时 Oracle 如果还按照通常的 ANTI JOIN 的处理逻辑来处理(实际和 INNER JOIN 的处理逻辑一致,差别在于只取不满足关联条件的结果,而 INNER JOIN 对 NULL 值是不敏感的),得到的结果就不对了。
为了解决 NOT IN 和 <>ALL 对 NULL 值敏感的问题,Oracle 推出了改良的 ANTI JOIN(11g 新增了参数 _OPTIMIZER_NULL_AWARE_ANTIJOIN
,默认为 true),这种反连接能够处理 NULL 值,Oracle 称其为 Null-Aware Anti Join(在真实的执行计划中显示为 XX ANTI NA)。
到这里我们能解释一个问题:为什么 OB 不能使用 HASH ANTI JOIN ?
原因是关联字段 AGENT_ID
没有 NOT NULL 约束,由于 NOT IN 对 NULL 敏感,不能使用普通的 ANTI JOIN,否则遇到 NULL 结果将不正确。Oracle 11g 推出的 Null-Aware ANTI JOIN 可以处理 NULL 敏感的场景,但是 OB 3.x 还没有这个功能,因此不能使用 HASH ANTI JOIN ,4.x 版本将推出 _OPTIMIZER_NULL_AWARE_ANTIJOIN
参数,和 Oracle 保持一致。
既然 NOT IN 对 NULL 敏感,有两个优化方向,先和业务确认 NOT IN 子查询结果集有没有可能出现 NULL,如果不会进一步确认关联字段 AGENT_ID
是否会有 NULL 值,如果不会则下面三种方式任选其一,最佳选择是方法 1,最符合开发规范:
AGENT_ID
字段加上 NOT NULL 约束,这样优化器就可以使用 HASH ANTI JOIN 了;- SELECT AGENT_ID, MAX(REL_AGENT_ID)
- FROM T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL t1
- WHERE NOT EXISTS (select AGENT_ID
- from T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL t2
- where t1.agent_id=t2.agent_id and valid_flg = '1')
- group by AGENT_ID;
改写后的执行计划走了 HASH RIGHT ANTI JOIN,执行耗时只要 50ms:
- ==========================================================================
- |ID|OPERATOR |NAME |EST. ROWS|COST |
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
- |0 |HASH GROUP BY | |146 |46828|
- |1 | HASH RIGHT ANTI JOIN| |149 |46697|
- |2 | SUBPLAN SCAN |VIEW1 |13880 |11115|
- |3 | TABLE SCAN |T2 |13880 |10906|
- |4 | TABLE SCAN |T1(I_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL_AGENT_ID)|27760 |10738|
- ==========================================================================
- SELECT AGENT_ID, MAX(REL_AGENT_ID)
- FROM T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL
- WHERE AGENT_ID NOT IN (select AGENT_ID
- from T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL
- where valid_flg = '1' and AGENT_ID is not null )
- and AGENT_ID is not null
- group by AGENT_ID;
执行计划:
- ==========================================================================================
- |ID|OPERATOR |NAME |EST. ROWS|COST |
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- |0 |HASH GROUP BY | |146 |47472|
- |1 | HASH RIGHT ANTI JOIN| |149 |47341|
- |2 | SUBPLAN SCAN |VIEW1 |13880 |11173|
- |3 | TABLE SCAN |T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL |13880 |10965|
- |4 | TABLE SCAN |T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL(I_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL_AGENT_ID)|27760 |11324|
- ==========================================================================================
问题 1. HASH JOIN 只能用于关联条件的等值查询,不支持连接条件是大于、小于、不等于和 LIKE 的场景。为什么 NOT IN、NOT EXISTS 可以使用 HASH ANTI JOIN?
NOT IN、NOT EXISTS 子查询和 WHERE t1.a!=t2.a
看起来相似,但其实语义是不一样的,下面例子可以说明。NOT IN 的语义其实是说如果有相等的值,则外表结果丢弃,因此本质上 NOT IN 的实现方式还是做等值查找,所以 HASH ANTI JOIN 的实现本质和 HASH JOIN 一样,只是在返回结果时做了相反的判断。
- obclient [TESTUSER]> select * from t1 t join t1 tt on t.a!=tt.a;
- +------+------+-----+------+------+-----+
- | A | B | C | A | B | C |
- +------+------+-----+------+------+-----+
- | 1 | aaa | aaa | 2 | bbb | bbb |
- | 1 | aaa | aaa | 3 | ccc | ccc |
- | 1 | aaa | aaa | 4 | NULL | ddd |
- | 2 | bbb | bbb | 1 | aaa | aaa |
- | 2 | bbb | bbb | 3 | ccc | ccc |
- | 2 | bbb | bbb | 4 | NULL | ddd |
- | 3 | ccc | ccc | 1 | aaa | aaa |
- | 3 | ccc | ccc | 2 | bbb | bbb |
- | 3 | ccc | ccc | 4 | NULL | ddd |
- | 4 | NULL | ddd | 1 | aaa | aaa |
- | 4 | NULL | ddd | 2 | bbb | bbb |
- | 4 | NULL | ddd | 3 | ccc | ccc |
- +------+------+-----+------+------+-----+
- 12 rows in set (0.005 sec)
-
- obclient [TESTUSER]> select t.* from t1 t where a not in(select tt.a from t1 tt);
- Empty set (0.005 sec)
![](https://csdnimg.cn/release/blogv2/dist/pc/img/newCodeMoreWhite.png)
这个还可以用 Oracle 的执行计划和优化报告来验证:
- ##执行计划的2号算子 HASH JOIN RIGHT ANTI NA 有如下条件,这里能说明是做的等值查找
- 2 - access("AGENT_ID"="AGENT_ID")
-
- ##另外可以通过下面方法查看优化器改写后的SQL:
- alter session set tracefile_identifier='10053c';
- alter session set events '10053 trace name context forever,level 1';
- 执行 SQL;
- alter session set events '10053 trace name context off';
- cd /u01/oracle/diag/rdbms/repo/repo/trace
- cat repo_ora_6702_10053c.trc 在 "Final query after transformations" 部分即为优化器改写后的SQL,关联条件也是等值查询:
- Final query after transformations:******* UNPARSED QUERY IS *******
- SELECT "T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL"."AGENT_ID" "AGENT_ID",MAX("T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL"."REL_AGENT_ID") "MAX(REL_AGENT_ID)" FROM "REPORT"."T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL" "T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL","REPORT"."T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL" "T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL" WHERE "T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL"."AGENT_ID"="T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL"."AGENT_ID" AND "T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL"."VALID_FLG"='1' GROUP BY "T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL"."AGENT_ID"
- kkoqbc: optimizing query block SEL$5DA710D3 (#1)
问题 2. 为什么 OB 可以使用 NESTED-LOOP ANTI JOIN?它能处理 NULL 敏感?怎么实现的?因为它的实现方式导致了对被驱动表只能全表扫描不能走索引?
从结果来看,OB 的 NESTED-LOOP ANTI JOIN 查询结果正确,能处理 NULL 敏感。
实现方式可以从执行计划看出一些端倪:
- ==============================================================================================
- |ID|OPERATOR |NAME |EST. ROWS|COST |
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- |0 |MERGE GROUP BY | |146 |62970523|
- |1 | NESTED-LOOP ANTI JOIN| |149 |62970511|
- |2 | TABLE SCAN |T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL(I_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL_AGENT_ID)|27760 |10738 |
- |3 | MATERIAL | |13880 |11313 |
- |4 | SUBPLAN SCAN |VIEW1 |13880 |11115 |
- |5 | TABLE SCAN |T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL |13880 |10906 |
- ==============================================================================================
-
- Outputs & filters:
- -------------------------------------
- 0 - output([T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL.AGENT_ID(0x7eeef19c3fe0)], [T_FUN_MAX(T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL.REL_AGENT_ID(0x7eeef19c50f0))(0x7eeef19c49e0)]), filter(nil),
- group([T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL.AGENT_ID(0x7eeef19c3fe0)]), agg_func([T_FUN_MAX(T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL.REL_AGENT_ID(0x7eeef19c50f0))(0x7eeef19c49e0)])
- 1 - output([T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL.AGENT_ID(0x7eeef19c3fe0)], [T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL.REL_AGENT_ID(0x7eeef19c50f0)]), filter(nil),
- conds([(T_OP_OR, T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL.AGENT_ID(0x7eeef19c3fe0) = VIEW1.AGENT_ID(0x7eeef19ce070)(0x7eeef19ce360), (T_OP_IS, T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL.AGENT_ID(0x7eeef19c3fe0), NULL, 0)(0x7eeef19cf2e0), (T_OP_IS, VIEW1.AGENT_ID(0x7eeef19ce070), NULL, 0)(0x7eeef19cfee0))(0x7eeef19cec00)]), nl_params_(nil), batch_join=false
- 2 - output([T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL.AGENT_ID(0x7eeef19c3fe0)], [T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL.REL_AGENT_ID(0x7eeef19c50f0)]), filter(nil),
- access([T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL.AGENT_ID(0x7eeef19c3fe0)], [T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL.REL_AGENT_ID(0x7eeef19c50f0)]), partitions(p0),
- is_index_back=false,
- range_key([T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL.AGENT_ID(0x7eeef19c3fe0)], [T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL.REL_AGENT_ID(0x7eeef19c50f0)]), range(MIN,MIN ; MAX,MAX)always true
- 3 - output([VIEW1.AGENT_ID(0x7eeef19ce070)]), filter(nil)
- 4 - output([VIEW1.AGENT_ID(0x7eeef19ce070)]), filter(nil),
- access([VIEW1.AGENT_ID(0x7eeef19ce070)])
- 5 - output([T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL.AGENT_ID(0x7eeef1a609a0)]), filter([T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL.VALID_FLG(0x7eeef1a606b0) = ?(0x7eeef1a60c90)]),
- access([T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL.VALID_FLG(0x7eeef1a606b0)], [T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL.AGENT_ID(0x7eeef1a609a0)]), partitions(p0),
- is_index_back=false, filter_before_indexback[false],
- range_key([T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL.REL_AGENT_ID(0x7eeef1a821a0)]), range(MIN ; MAX)always true
![](https://csdnimg.cn/release/blogv2/dist/pc/img/newCodeMoreWhite.png)
把 1 号 NESTED-LOOP ANTI JOIN 算子的 Outputs & filters 单独拿出来看:
- 1 - output([T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL.AGENT_ID(0x7eeef19c3fe0)], [T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL.REL_AGENT_ID(0x7eeef19c50f0)]), filter(nil),
- conds([(T_OP_OR, T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL.AGENT_ID(0x7eeef19c3fe0) = VIEW1.AGENT_ID(0x7eeef19ce070)(0x7eeef19ce360), (T_OP_IS, T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL.AGENT_ID(0x7eeef19c3fe0), NULL, 0)(0x7eeef19cf2e0), (T_OP_IS, VIEW1.AGENT_ID(0x7eeef19ce070), NULL, 0)(0x7eeef19cfee0))(0x7eeef19cec00)]), nl_params_(nil), batch_join=false
匹配条件是:
- where T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL.AGENT_ID=VIEW1.AGENT_ID
- Or T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL.AGENT_ID is NULL -- 判断父查询AGENT_ID是否为空,如果遇到 NULL值,则剔除这行结果
- Or VIEW1.AGENT_ID is NULL -- 判断子查询结果集 AGENT_ID是否为 NULL,如果遇到NULL值,直接进入JOIN_END阶段,不返回任何数据
以上逻辑是可以实现 NULL 值敏感的。
按照这个逻辑,即使加上 Or VIEW1.AGENT_ID IS NULL 条件,被驱动表依然是可以使用索引的,只有 IS NOT NULL 无法使用索引:
- ##SQL
- select AGENT_ID from T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL
- where AGENT_ID='124253' or AGENT_ID is null;
-
- ##执行计划
- ==============================================================================
- |ID|OPERATOR |NAME |EST. ROWS|COST|
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- |0 |TABLE SCAN|T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL(I_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL_AGENT_ID)|1 |46 |
- ==============================================================================
-
- Outputs & filters:
- -------------------------------------
- 0 - output([T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL.AGENT_ID(0x7eef739f9120)]), filter(nil),
- access([T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL.AGENT_ID(0x7eef739f9120)]), partitions(p0),
- is_index_back=false,
- range_key([T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL.AGENT_ID(0x7eef739f9120)], [T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL.REL_AGENT_ID(0x7eef73a40830)]), range(124253,MIN ; 124253,MAX), (NULL,MIN ; NULL,MAX),
- range_cond([T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL.AGENT_ID(0x7eef739f9120) = ?(0x7eef739f7a50) OR (T_OP_IS, T_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL.AGENT_ID(0x7eef739f9120), NULL, 0)(0x7eef739f86d0)(0x7eef739f6dd0)])
![](https://csdnimg.cn/release/blogv2/dist/pc/img/newCodeMoreWhite.png)
按照经验,此时我们应该到 Oracle 上看看 NESTED-LOOP ANTI JOIN NA 的处理逻辑,不过在 Oracle 上调不出这个执行计划,因此线索中断。
推断:目前 3.x 版本没有实现真正意义上的 NESTED-LOOP ANTI JOIN NA,但是 NESTED-LOOP ANTI JOIN 可以正确处理 NULL 敏感。4.x 会实现 NESTED-LOOP ANTI JOIN NA,实现方式就是我们前面推理出的逻辑,也就是说 3.x 用的不是这一套逻辑,执行计划虽然这么显示,但实际不一样,对被驱动表匹配查询时就是要遍历全表,不能直接走索引匹配。
问题 3. 加/*+ no_rewrite */
后,走 SUBPLAN FILTER 算子,父查询显示可以走索引,为什么执行效率还是慢?
加 /*+ no_rewrite */
的执行计划,执行耗时 7 秒,比原始 SQL 耗时 16 秒快,从执行逻辑来看:
- ======================================================================
- |ID|OPERATOR |NAME |EST. ROWS|COST |
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------
- |0 |MERGE GROUP BY | |3659 |58062035|
- |1 | SUBPLAN FILTER| |13880 |58061224|
- |2 | TABLE SCAN |A(I_LDIM_AGENT_UPREL_AGENT_ID)|27760 |10738 |
- |3 | TABLE SCAN |B |13880 |10906 |
- ======================================================================
-
- Outputs & filters:
- -------------------------------------
- 0 - output([A.AGENT_ID(0x7ee843c44330)], [T_FUN_MAX(A.REL_AGENT_ID(0x7ee843c45440))(0x7ee843c44d30)]), filter(nil),
- group([A.AGENT_ID(0x7ee843c44330)]), agg_func([T_FUN_MAX(A.REL_AGENT_ID(0x7ee843c45440))(0x7ee843c44d30)])
- 1 - output([A.AGENT_ID(0x7ee843c44330)], [A.REL_AGENT_ID(0x7ee843c45440)]), filter([A.AGENT_ID(0x7ee843c44330) != ALL(subquery(1)(0x7ee843bf8e60))(0x7ee843bf8470)]),
- exec_params_(nil), onetime_exprs_(nil), init_plan_idxs_([1])
- 2 - output([A.AGENT_ID(0x7ee843c44330)], [A.REL_AGENT_ID(0x7ee843c45440)]), filter(nil),
- access([A.AGENT_ID(0x7ee843c44330)], [A.REL_AGENT_ID(0x7ee843c45440)]), partitions(p0),
- is_index_back=false,
- range_key([A.AGENT_ID(0x7ee843c44330)], [A.REL_AGENT_ID(0x7ee843c45440)]), range(MIN,MIN ; MAX,MAX)always true
- 3 - output([B.AGENT_ID(0x7ee843c41350)]), filter([B.VALID_FLG(0x7ee843c40c40) = ?(0x7ee843c40520)]),
- access([B.VALID_FLG(0x7ee843c40c40)], [B.AGENT_ID(0x7ee843c41350)]), partitions(p0),
- is_index_back=false, filter_before_indexback[false],
- range_key([B.REL_AGENT_ID(0x7ee843cb5bb0)]), range(MIN ; MAX)always true
![](https://csdnimg.cn/release/blogv2/dist/pc/img/newCodeMoreWhite.png)
Copyright © 2003-2013 www.wpsshop.cn 版权所有,并保留所有权利。