11gsortmergejoin

测试sort merge join

成都创新互联公司是一家专业从事网站设计、做网站的网络公司。作为专业网络公司,成都创新互联公司依托的技术实力、以及多年的网站运营经验,为您提供专业的成都网站建设、全网整合营销推广及网站设计开发服务！

When the Optimizer Considers Sort Merge Joins

A hash join requires one hash table and one probe of this table, whereas a sort merge join requires two sorts.

The optimizer may choose a sort merge join over a hash join for joining large amounts of data when any of the following conditions is true:

The join condition between two tables is not an equijoin, that is, uses an inequality condition such as <, <=, >, or >=.

In contrast to sort merges, hash joins require an equality condition.

Because of sorts required by other operations, the optimizer finds it cheaper to use a sort merge.

If an index exists, then the database can avoid sorting the first data set. However, the database always sorts the second data set, regardless of indexes.

SQL> create table t1 (id number);

Table created.

SQL> create table t2 (id number);

Table created.

SQL> insert into t1 values(2);

1 row created.

SQL> insert into t1 values(1);

1 row created.

SQL> insert into t1 values(5);

1 row created.

SQL> insert into t1 values(3);

1 row created.

SQL> commit;

SQL> select * from t1;

        ID
----------
         2
         1
         5
         3

SQL> insert into t2 values(11);

1 row created.

SQL> insert into t2 values(9);

1 row created.

SQL> insert into t2 values(1);

1 row created.

SQL> commit;

SQL> select * from t2;

        ID
----------
        11
         9
         1

SQL> 

SQL> exec dbms_stats.gather_table_stats('SYS','T1');

PL/SQL procedure successfully completed.

SQL> exec dbms_stats.gather_table_stats('SYS','T2');

PL/SQL procedure successfully completed.

SQL> set autot off
SQL> create index ind_id on t1(Id);

Index created.

SQL> set autot traceonly
SQL> select * from t1,t2 where t1.id>t2.id;

Execution Plan
----------------------------------------------------------
Plan hash value: 1335671014

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id  | Operation           | Name   | Rows  | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT    |        |     2 |    12 |     4  (25)| 00:00:01 |
|   1 |  MERGE JOIN         |        |     2 |    12 |     4  (25)| 00:00:01 |
|   2 |   SORT JOIN         |        |     4 |    12 |     1   (0)| 00:00:01 |
|   3 |    INDEX FULL SCAN  | IND_ID |     4 |    12 |     1   (0)| 00:00:01 |
|*  4 |   SORT JOIN         |        |     3 |     9 |     3  (34)| 00:00:01 |
|   5 |    TABLE ACCESS FULL| T2     |     3 |     9 |     2   (0)| 00:00:01 |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
---------------------------------------------------

   4 - access(INTERNAL_FUNCTION("T1"."ID")>INTERNAL_FUNCTION("T2"."ID"))
       filter(INTERNAL_FUNCTION("T1"."ID")>INTERNAL_FUNCTION("T2"."ID"))

Statistics
----------------------------------------------------------
          1  recursive calls
          0  db block gets
          3  consistent gets
          0  physical reads
          0  redo size
        652  bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
        519  bytes received via SQL*Net from client
          2  SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
          2  sorts (memory)
          0  sorts (disk)
          3  rows processed