Kindly help and suggest pointers to look for.
Thanks and Regards,
I'm not really sure I am the person to ask on this. I think I would ask the question of one of the performance gurus.
So as far as you are concerned:
- The query is the same.
- The volume of data has increased.
- The execution plan is *exactly* the same, except for the cardinality of the operations has presumably increased.
- The amount of memory used by a hash join operation has reduced.
Like I said, I'm not performance guru, but I would be wondering if the has table is overflowing to disk, so Oracle is not bothering to allocate more memory, in a kind-of, "I'm already having to overflow, so what's the point in grabbing more memory", type scenario. This is just me thinking out loud. I have no evidence to say the optimizer will make those sort of decisions...
Oracle ACE Director
Oracle ACE of the Year 2006 - Oracle Magazine Editors Choice Awards
OCP DBA 7.3, 8, 8i, 9i, 10g, 11g
OCP Advanced PL/SQL Developer
Oracle Database: SQL Certified Expert
My website: https://oracle-base.com
My blog: https://oracle-base.com/blog
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests