![oracle 10g tablespace fragmentation oracle 10g tablespace fragmentation](https://help.sap.com/saphelp_nw73/helpdata/en/45/18f99ed1590067e10000000a1553f7/loio4518fa8dd1590067e10000000a1553f7_LowRes.png)
- Oracle 10g tablespace fragmentation driver#
- Oracle 10g tablespace fragmentation full#
- Oracle 10g tablespace fragmentation free#
we need to release undo tablespaces on linux box. After completion we found that data ,index and Undo tablespaces are getting full. We have run the request for create accounting with SLA diagnostics enabled.
Oracle 10g tablespace fragmentation free#
Or, if you have everything you're returning and selecting is in one index.Undo tablespace showing free not released on linux box.
Oracle 10g tablespace fragmentation full#
This will only really matter if you do not use as full scan. and on flet of field19, extra_id, field1.For this, and if possible, I would have indexes on: Your indexes seem to be separate column indexes as well.
![oracle 10g tablespace fragmentation oracle 10g tablespace fragmentation](http://www.webbasedprogramming.com/Oracle-Unleashed/16oun01.gif)
Oracle 10g tablespace fragmentation driver#
Try to use the smaller as a driver first: SELECT /*+ full(c) */ c.flh_id_messaggioīut you may have to change /*+ full(c) */ to /*+ full(c) full(f) */. My suggestion would be to force a full scan of one or both of your tables. This means that for every single row you, you're going into both tables one row at a time, which when you're looking a significant proportion of a table or index is not what you want to do. Whilst to select a single row you cannot - to my knowledge - get faster, in your case you're selecting a lot more than a single row. You're accessing both tables by index rowid. The simple answer seems to be your explain plan. But above all, don't implement partitioning unless you really know the ramifications. Use the 10053 event to understand why the Optimizer makes the choices it does. Use the Wait Interface to investigate where the database is spending its time. Tuning is a science and to do it properly requires lots of data. Of course these are just guesses on my part. It's unlikely you would want to replace ETL_EIF_FK_IDX4 with this (especially if that really is an index on a foreign key constraint). Something like etl_elab_interf_flat(etl_elab_interf_flat,eif_campo200,dde_identif_dati_ext_id,eif_campo1,eif_campo198). But you should probably lead with the least selective columns. Agsin you need to understand the distribution and skew of the data. You could also use a composite index on the other table to avoid table reads. You might be able to benefit from index compression.Īll the columns in the query projection are referenced in the WHERE clause. This would be a new index or a replacement for ENI_FLK_IDX3 depends on the otherĪctivity against the table. A composite index onĮni_flussi_hub(flh_tipo_processo_cod,flh_flag_ann,idde_identif_dati_ext_id,įlh_fornitura,flh_id_messaggio) would avoid the need to read that table. That might still be too slow, or it might be too disruptive for other users.Īn alternative approach would be to use better indexes. You could try parallel query to improve things. If you have an Enterprise Edition licence and plenty of CPU capacity So what can you do? One approach is to follow Ben's suggestion, and use full Performance suggests that the distribution and/or skew of theįlh_tipo_processo_cod and flh_flag_ann columns is not good. Skew - which values appear very often or hardly at all. So you need to understandīoth the distribution of your data - how many distinct values you have - and its Identifies relatively few columns with a value of 'N'. It might even be a good path of the flag column Now, the starting point is a good one if flh_tipo_processo_cod is a selectiveĬolumn: that is, if it contains hundreds of different values, or if the values in