Window functions SORT costly, can we overcome it?
Analytic function performance may depend on the index column order. Changing the index from (ACCTNUM,DEPT_NUM)
to (DEPT_NUM,ACCTNUM)
may lower the cost and remove the need for temporary tablespace.
partition by COL_2 order by COL_1 => INDEX FAST FULL SCAN|WINDOW SORT PUSHED RANK
partition by COL_1 order by COL_2 => INDEX FULL SCAN|WINDOW NOSORT
INDEX FAST FULL SCAN uses faster multi-block IO but it also requires sorting the data and possibly temporary tablespace for the sort area.
INDEX FULL SCAN uses slower single-block IO but it returns the data in order and avoids sorting.
Sample schema and data
--drop table mytable;
create table mytable(dept_num number not null, acctnum number not null
,a number, b number, c number, d number, e number);
insert into mytable
select 1 dept_num, 1 acctnum, 0,0,0,0,0 from dual union all
select 1 dept_num, 2 acctnum, 0,0,0,0,0 from dual union all
select 1 dept_num, 3 acctnum, 0,0,0,0,0 from dual union all
select 2 dept_num, 1 acctnum, 0,0,0,0,0 from dual union all
select 2 dept_num, 2 acctnum, 0,0,0,0,0 from dual union all
select 3 dept_num, 1 acctnum, 0,0,0,0,0 from dual;
--Create 600K similar rows.
insert into mytable
select dept_num + rownumber*3, acctnum, a,b,c,d,e
from mytable
cross join (select level rownumber from dual connect by level <= 100000);
begin
dbms_stats.gather_table_stats(user, 'mytable');
end;
/
(ACCTNUM,DEPT_NUM) = WINDOW SORT PUSHED RANK
create index mytable_idx on mytable(acctnum, dept_num);
explain plan for
select dept_num, acctnum from
(
select dept_num, acctnum
,row_number() over (partition by dept_num order by acctnum) as row_identifier
from mytable
)
where row_identifier between 1 and 10;
select * from table(dbms_xplan.display);
Plan hash value: 952182109
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id | Operation | Name | Rows | Bytes |TempSpc| Cost (%CPU)| Time |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| 0 | SELECT STATEMENT | | 600K| 22M| | 1625 (3)| 00:00:23 |
|* 1 | VIEW | | 600K| 22M| | 1625 (3)| 00:00:23 |
|* 2 | WINDOW SORT PUSHED RANK| | 600K| 4687K| 9424K| 1625 (3)| 00:00:23 |
| 3 | INDEX FAST FULL SCAN | MYTABLE_IDX | 600K| 4687K| | 239 (3)| 00:00:04 |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
---------------------------------------------------
1 - filter("ROW_IDENTIFIER">=1 AND "ROW_IDENTIFIER"<=10)
2 - filter(ROW_NUMBER() OVER ( PARTITION BY "DEPT_NUM" ORDER BY "ACCTNUM")<=10)
(DEPT_NUM,ACCTNUM) = WINDOW NOSORT
drop index mytable_idx;
create index mytable_idx on mytable(dept_num, acctnum);
explain plan for
select dept_num, acctnum from
(
select dept_num, acctnum
,row_number() over (partition by dept_num order by acctnum) as row_identifier
from mytable
)
where row_identifier between 1 and 10;
select * from table(dbms_xplan.display);
Plan hash value: 1773829932
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id | Operation | Name | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time |
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| 0 | SELECT STATEMENT | | 600K| 22M| 792 (2)| 00:00:12 |
|* 1 | VIEW | | 600K| 22M| 792 (2)| 00:00:12 |
|* 2 | WINDOW NOSORT | | 600K| 4687K| 792 (2)| 00:00:12 |
| 3 | INDEX FULL SCAN| MYTABLE_IDX | 600K| 4687K| 792 (2)| 00:00:12 |
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
---------------------------------------------------
1 - filter("ROW_IDENTIFIER">=1 AND "ROW_IDENTIFIER"<=10)
2 - filter(ROW_NUMBER() OVER ( PARTITION BY "DEPT_NUM" ORDER BY
"ACCTNUM")<=10)
Maheswaran Ravisankar
iOS and Android Developer for Native and Hybrid (Angular/React JS/Ionic) Apps currently. My previous works were in Oracle SQL and PL/SQL Development SQL*Loader UNIX Scripting Java Webservices Core Java / JDBC MongoDB Visual Basic for internal Applications and I have 14 years of experience in FinTech!
Updated on June 28, 2022Comments
-
Maheswaran Ravisankar almost 2 years
My Requirement: Identify top 10 accounts of a
DEPT_NUM
, ordered by the account number in ascending order.Query:
SELECT * FROM ( select acctnum,dept_num,row_number() OVER (PARTITION BY DEPT_NUM ORDER BY ACCTNUM) as row_identifier FROM MYTABLE ) WHERE row_identifier between 1 and 10;
Trace:
7532 rows selected. Execution Plan ---------------------------------------------------------- Plan hash value: 1480074522 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Id | Operation | Name | Rows | Bytes |TempSpc| Cost (%CPU)| Time | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | 0 | SELECT STATEMENT | | 577K| 15M| | 3855 (1)| 00:00:47 | |* 1 | VIEW | | 577K| 15M| | 3855 (1)| 00:00:47 | |* 2 | WINDOW SORT PUSHED RANK| | 577K| 7890K| 13M| 3855 (1)| 00:00:47 | | 3 | INDEX FAST FULL SCAN | IMTAB05 | 577K| 7890K| | 987 (1)| 00:00:12 | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Predicate Information (identified by operation id): --------------------------------------------------- 1 - filter("ROW_IDENTIFIER">=1 AND "ROW_IDENTIFIER"<=5) 2 - filter(ROW_NUMBER() OVER ( PARTITION BY "DEPT_NUM" ORDER BY "ACCTNUM")<=5) Statistics ---------------------------------------------------------- 0 recursive calls 2 db block gets 4298 consistent gets 0 physical reads 0 redo size 144367 bytes sent via SQL*Net to client 486 bytes received via SQL*Net from client 3 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client 1 sorts (memory) 0 sorts (disk) 7532 rows processed
Index:
The
index scan
says,INDEX STORAGE
on a columnDEPT_NUM
.Forcing
Full Table
scan made cost from 3855 to 11092Total number of rows in the table is 632667;
All the above are test region results. Production actually has twice the amount.
My Database is Exadata, Quarter RAC. Running Oracle 11g R2. The databse is powerful enough to execute it instantly, But DBA were reluctant on the tempSpc of 13M. Business reported the frequency of this report would be 4 times an hour. And Main thing is, this table gets a Lot of real time inserts/updates
Can we improvise the process like
1) Increasing the PGA for a session?(Not sure, if it really possible?)
2) Will An additional index help?Just want some different eyes to look on this, as our group is totally focusing on the DBA parameters only.
Thanks for any kind of suggestions!
-
Maheswaran Ravisankar almost 10 yearsThanks for stopping by to help out. And your solution make sense, I shall create the indexes at my workplace and let you know the results!