执行计划中常见index访问方式(转)

近期有朋友对于单个表上的index各种情况比较模糊,这里对于单个表上,单个index出现的大多数情况进行了总结性测试,给出了测试结果,至于为什么出现这样的试验结果未做过多解释,给读者留下思考的空间.本篇文章仅仅是为了测试hint对index的影响,而不是说明走各种index方式的好坏.参考: INDEX FULL SCAN vs INDEX FAST FULL SCAN
创建表模拟测试

SQL> create table t_xifenfei as select object_id,object_name from dba_objects;

Table created.

SQL>  create index i_t_object_id on t_xifenfei(object_id);

Index created.

SQL> exec dbms_stats.gather_table_stats(USER,‘T_XIFENFEI‘,cascade=>true);

PL/SQL procedure successfully completed.

SQL> desc t_xifenfei

 Name                                      Null?    Type

 ----------------------------------------- -------- ----------------------------

 OBJECT_ID                                          NUMBER

 OBJECT_NAME                                        VARCHAR2(128)

TABLE ACCESS FULL

SQL> SET AUTOT TRACE EXP STAT

SQL> SELECT OBJECT_ID FROM T_XIFENFEI;

49838 rows selected.

Execution Plan

----------------------------------------------------------

Plan hash value: 548923532

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| Id  | Operation         | Name       | Rows  | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT  |            | 49838 |   243K|    57   (2)| 00:00:01 |

|   1 |  TABLE ACCESS FULL| T_XIFENFEI | 49838 |   243K|    57   (2)| 00:00:01 |

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Statistics

----------------------------------------------------------

          1  recursive calls

          0  db block gets

       3544  consistent gets

          0  physical reads

          0  redo size

     721203  bytes sent via SQL*Net to client

      36927  bytes received via SQL*Net from client

       3324  SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client

          0  sorts (memory)

          0  sorts (disk)

      49838  rows processed

SQL> SELECT /*+ INDEX(T i_t_object_id) */ OBJECT_ID FROM T_XIFENFEI;

49838 rows selected.

Execution Plan

----------------------------------------------------------

Plan hash value: 548923532

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| Id  | Operation         | Name       | Rows  | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT  |            | 49838 |   243K|    57   (2)| 00:00:01 |

|   1 |  TABLE ACCESS FULL| T_XIFENFEI | 49838 |   243K|    57   (2)| 00:00:01 |

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Statistics

----------------------------------------------------------

          1  recursive calls

          0  db block gets

       3544  consistent gets

          0  physical reads

          0  redo size

     721203  bytes sent via SQL*Net to client

      36927  bytes received via SQL*Net from client

       3324  SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client

          0  sorts (memory)

          0  sorts (disk)

      49838  rows processed

从上面的执行计划中可知,此时走了全表扫描. 由于我们需要查询的列为object_id,因此理论上只需要读取索引就应该可以返回所有数据,而此时为什么是全表扫描呢？ 这是因为NULL值与索引的特性所决定的.即null值不会被存储到B树索引.因此应该为表 t_xifenfei 的列 object_id 添加 not null 约束.

INDEX FAST FULL SCAN

SQL> alter table t_xifenfei modify(object_id not null);  

Table altered.

SQL> SELECT  object_id from t_xifenfei;

49838 rows selected.

Execution Plan

----------------------------------------------------------

Plan hash value: 2036340805

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| Id  | Operation            | Name          | Rows  | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT     |               | 49838 |   243K|    27   (4)| 00:00:01 |

|   1 |  INDEX FAST FULL SCAN| I_T_OBJECT_ID | 49838 |   243K|    27   (4)| 00:00:01 |

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Statistics

----------------------------------------------------------

          1  recursive calls

          0  db block gets

       3432  consistent gets

          0  physical reads

          0  redo size

     721203  bytes sent via SQL*Net to client

      36927  bytes received via SQL*Net from client

       3324  SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client

          0  sorts (memory)

          0  sorts (disk)

      49838  rows processed

INDEX FAST FULL SCAN:当在高速缓存中没有找到所需的索引块时,则根据db_file_multiblock_read_count的值进行多块读操作.对于索引的分支结构只是简单的获取,然后扫描所有的叶结点.其结果是导致索引结构没有访问,获取的数据没有根据索引键的顺序排序.INDEX FAST FULL SCAN使用multiblock_read,故产生db file scattered reads 事件.

INDEX RANGE SCAN

SQL> select object_id from t_xifenfei where object_id<10;

8 rows selected.

Execution Plan

----------------------------------------------------------

Plan hash value: 2197008162

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| Id  | Operation        | Name          | Rows  | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT |               |     2 |    10 |     2   (0)| 00:00:01 |

|*  1 |  INDEX RANGE SCAN| I_T_OBJECT_ID |     2 |    10 |     2   (0)| 00:00:01 |

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Predicate Information (identified by operation id):

---------------------------------------------------

   1 - access("OBJECT_ID"<10)

Statistics

----------------------------------------------------------

          1  recursive calls

          0  db block gets

          3  consistent gets

          0  physical reads

          0  redo size

        499  bytes sent via SQL*Net to client

        385  bytes received via SQL*Net from client

          2  SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client

          0  sorts (memory)

          0  sorts (disk)

          8  rows processed

SQL> select /*+ index_ffs(t i_t_object_id) */ object_id from t_xifenfei t where object_id<10;

8 rows selected.

Execution Plan

----------------------------------------------------------

Plan hash value: 2036340805

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| Id  | Operation            | Name          | Rows  | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT     |               |     2 |    10 |    27   (4)| 00:00:01 |

|*  1 |  INDEX FAST FULL SCAN| I_T_OBJECT_ID |     2 |    10 |    27   (4)| 00:00:01 |

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Predicate Information (identified by operation id):

---------------------------------------------------

   1 - filter("OBJECT_ID"<10)

Statistics

----------------------------------------------------------

          1  recursive calls

          0  db block gets

        118  consistent gets

          0  physical reads

          0  redo size

        499  bytes sent via SQL*Net to client

        385  bytes received via SQL*Net from client

          2  SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client

          0  sorts (memory)

          0  sorts (disk)

          8  rows processed

1

这里可以看出index_ffs已经生效,但是对于这样的情况hint index_ffs效率一般来说不会太高.

<br>

<strong>INDEX FULL SCAN</strong>

1

SQL> SELECT /*+ INDEX(T i_t_object_id) */ object_id  from t_xifenfei t;

49838 rows selected.

Execution Plan

----------------------------------------------------------

Plan hash value: 431110666

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| Id  | Operation        | Name          | Rows  | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT |               | 49838 |   243K|   113   (2)| 00:00:02 |

|   1 |  INDEX FULL SCAN | I_T_OBJECT_ID | 49838 |   243K|   113   (2)| 00:00:02 |

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Statistics

----------------------------------------------------------

          1  recursive calls

          0  db block gets

       3426  consistent gets

          0  physical reads

          0  redo size

     721203  bytes sent via SQL*Net to client

      36927  bytes received via SQL*Net from client

       3324  SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client

          0  sorts (memory)

          0  sorts (disk)

      49838  rows processed

INDEX FULL SCAN:完全按照索引存储的顺序依次访问整个索引树.当访问到叶结点之后,按照双向链表方式读取相连节点的值.换言之,对于索引上所有的数据是按照有序的方式来读取的.如果索引块没有在高速缓存中被找到时,则需要从数据文件中单块进行读取.对于需要读取大量数据的全索引扫描而言,这将使其变得低效.INDEX FULL SCAN使用single read,故产生db file sequential reads事件.新版的Oracle支持db file parallel reads方式.
HINT INDEX不会使用INDEX FAST FULL SCAN功能.

INDEX列ORDER BY

SQL> SELECT OBJECT_ID FROM T_XIFENFEI order by object_id ;

49838 rows selected.

Execution Plan

----------------------------------------------------------

Plan hash value: 431110666

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| Id  | Operation        | Name          | Rows  | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT |               | 49838 |   243K|   113   (2)| 00:00:02 |

|   1 |  INDEX FULL SCAN | I_T_OBJECT_ID | 49838 |   243K|   113   (2)| 00:00:02 |

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Statistics

----------------------------------------------------------

          1  recursive calls

          0  db block gets

       3426  consistent gets

          0  physical reads

          0  redo size

     721203  bytes sent via SQL*Net to client

      36927  bytes received via SQL*Net from client

       3324  SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client

          0  sorts (memory)

          0  sorts (disk)

      49838  rows processed

SQL> SELECT OBJECT_ID FROM T_XIFENFEI order by object_id  desc;

49838 rows selected.

Execution Plan

----------------------------------------------------------

Plan hash value: 2808014233

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| Id  | Operation                  | Name          | Rows  | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT           |               | 49838 |   243K|   113   (2)| 00:00:02 |

|   1 |  INDEX FULL SCAN DESCENDING| I_T_OBJECT_ID | 49838 |   243K|   113   (2)| 00:00:02 |

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Statistics

----------------------------------------------------------

          1  recursive calls

          0  db block gets

       3427  consistent gets

          0  physical reads

          0  redo size

     721203  bytes sent via SQL*Net to client

      36927  bytes received via SQL*Net from client

       3324  SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client

          0  sorts (memory)

          0  sorts (disk)

      49838  rows processed

SQL> SELECT  /*+ index_ffs(t i_t_object_id) */ object_id from t_xifenfei t order by object_id;

49838 rows selected.

Execution Plan

----------------------------------------------------------

Plan hash value: 2527678987

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| Id  | Operation             | Name          | Rows  | Bytes |TempSpc| Cost (%CPU)| Time     |

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT      |               | 49838 |   243K|       |   185   (4)| 00:00:03 |

|   1 |  SORT ORDER BY        |               | 49838 |   243K|  1192K|   185   (4)| 00:00:03 |

|   2 |   INDEX FAST FULL SCAN| I_T_OBJECT_ID | 49838 |   243K|       |    27   (4)| 00:00:01 |

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Statistics

----------------------------------------------------------

          1  recursive calls

          0  db block gets

        117  consistent gets

          0  physical reads

          0  redo size

     721203  bytes sent via SQL*Net to client

      36927  bytes received via SQL*Net from client

       3324  SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client

          1  sorts (memory)

          0  sorts (disk)

      49838  rows processed

对于index 列排序,默认情况下会使用INDEX FULL SCAN/INDEX FULL SCAN DESCENDING而不选择使用INDEX FAST FULL SCAN,因为INDEX FAST FULL SCAN获得数据后,还需要做一次SORT ORDER BY操作

INDEX FAST FULL SCAN+SORT AGGREGATE

SQL> SELECT  count(object_id) FROM T_XIFENFEI;

Execution Plan

----------------------------------------------------------

Plan hash value: 3095383276

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| Id  | Operation             | Name          | Rows  | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT      |               |     1 |    27   (4)| 00:00:01 |

|   1 |  SORT AGGREGATE       |               |     1 |            |          |

|   2 |   INDEX FAST FULL SCAN| I_T_OBJECT_ID | 49838 |    27   (4)| 00:00:01 |

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Statistics

----------------------------------------------------------

          1  recursive calls

          0  db block gets

        117  consistent gets

          0  physical reads

          0  redo size

        421  bytes sent via SQL*Net to client

        385  bytes received via SQL*Net from client

          2  SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client

          0  sorts (memory)

          0  sorts (disk)

          1  rows processed

SQL> SELECT  /*+ INDEX(T i_t_object_id) */ count(object_id) FROM T_XIFENFEI t;

Execution Plan

----------------------------------------------------------

Plan hash value: 3079973526

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

| Id  | Operation        | Name          | Rows  | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT |               |     1 |   113   (2)| 00:00:02 |

|   1 |  SORT AGGREGATE  |               |     1 |            |          |

|   2 |   INDEX FULL SCAN| I_T_OBJECT_ID | 49838 |   113   (2)| 00:00:02 |

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Statistics

----------------------------------------------------------

          1  recursive calls

          0  db block gets

        111  consistent gets

          0  physical reads

          0  redo size

        421  bytes sent via SQL*Net to client

        385  bytes received via SQL*Net from client

          2  SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client

          0  sorts (memory)

          0  sorts (disk)

          1  rows processed

sort aggregate通常发生在使用一些聚合函数的时候,sum(),avg(),min(),max(),count()等等,实际上sort aggregate不做真正的sort,并不会用到排序空间,而是通过一个全局变量＋全表或全索引扫描来实现.这样的操作在默认情况下使用INDEX FAST FULL SCAN

INDEX FULL SCAN (MIN/MAX)

SQL> SELECT  max(object_id) FROM T_XIFENFEI;

Execution Plan

----------------------------------------------------------

Plan hash value: 2939893782

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| Id  | Operation                  | Name          | Rows  | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT           |               |     1 |     5 |     2   (0)| 00:00:01 |

|   1 |  SORT AGGREGATE            |               |     1 |     5 |            |          |

|   2 |   INDEX FULL SCAN (MIN/MAX)| I_T_OBJECT_ID | 49838 |   243K|     2   (0)| 00:00:01 |

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Statistics

----------------------------------------------------------

          1  recursive calls

          0  db block gets

          2  consistent gets

          0  physical reads

          0  redo size

        419  bytes sent via SQL*Net to client

        385  bytes received via SQL*Net from client

          2  SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client

          0  sorts (memory)

          0  sorts (disk)

          1  rows processed

SQL>  SELECT /*+ index_ffs(t i_t_object_id) */ max(object_id) FROM T_XIFENFEI t;

Execution Plan

----------------------------------------------------------

Plan hash value: 2939893782

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| Id  | Operation                  | Name          | Rows  | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT           |               |     1 |     5 |    27   (4)| 00:00:01 |

|   1 |  SORT AGGREGATE            |               |     1 |     5 |            |          |

|   2 |   INDEX FULL SCAN (MIN/MAX)| I_T_OBJECT_ID | 49838 |   243K|    27   (4)| 00:00:01 |

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Statistics

----------------------------------------------------------

          1  recursive calls

          0  db block gets

          2  consistent gets

          0  physical reads

          0  redo size

        419  bytes sent via SQL*Net to client

        385  bytes received via SQL*Net from client

          2  SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client

          0  sorts (memory)

          0  sorts (disk)

          1  rows processed

对于这样的查询INDEX FULL SCAN (MIN/MAX)明显是最优,但是此处奇怪的是使用了index_ffs提示无效,如果有知道的朋友,麻烦告知原因.

http://www.xifenfei.com/2968.html

时间： 2024-11-18 16:19:02

执行计划中常见index访问方式(转)的相关文章

执行计划中各字段各模块描述

在SQL语句的执行计划中,包含很多字段项和很多模块,其不同字段代表了不同的含义且在不同的情形下某些字段.模块显示或不显示,下 面的描述给出了执行计划中各字段的含义以及各模块的描述. 有关执行计划中各字段模块的描述请参考: 执行计划中各字段各模块描述        有关由SQL语句来获取执行计划请参考:     使用 EXPLAIN PLAN 获取SQL语句执行计划        有关使用autotrace来获取执行计划请参考:启用 AUTOTRACE 功能        有关display_cu

转：Sql Server中的表访问方式Table Scan, Index Scan, Index Seek

0.参考文献 Table Scan, Index Scan, Index Seek SQL SERVER – Index Seek vs. Index Scan – Diffefence and Usage – A Simple Note oracle表访问方式 Index Seek和Index Scan的区别以及适用情况 1.oracle中的表访问方式 在oracle中有表访问方式的说法,访问表中的数据主要通过三种方式进行访问: 全表扫描(full table scan),直接访问数据页,查找

MySQL 执行计划中Extra(Using where,Using index,Using index condition,Using index,Using where)的浅析

  关于如何理解MySQL执行计划中Extra列的Using where.Using Index.Using index condition,Using index,Using where这四者的区别.首先,我们来看看官方文档关于三者的简单介绍(官方文档并没有介绍Using index,Using where这种情况): Using index (JSON property: using_index) The column information is retrieved from the ta

SQL Server 执行计划中的扫描方式举例说明

原文地址:http://www.cnblogs.com/zihunqingxin/p/3201155.html 1.执行计划使用方式 选中需要执行的语句,点击Ctrl+L执行 2.示例student表,id,name,addressid上建立聚集索引Name建索引address无索引 3.区别1. [Table Scan]:遍历整个表,查找所有匹配的记录行.这个操作将会一行一行的检查,当然,效率也是最差的.以无索引字段为条件,按存放顺序一个个查,where address='123' 2. [I

[转载] EXPLAIN执行计划中要重点关注哪些要素

原文: https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s?__biz=MjM5NzAzMTY4NQ==&mid=400738936&idx=1&sn=2910b4119b9943bafdcfe950dc89e028&scene=0&uin=Mjk1ODMyNTYyMg%3D%3D&key=04dce534b3b035ef3da41c55e69b6792390d87f8207be3e924d28fab0b6ac41a02549bf7410a7849c9f2

EXPLAIN执行计划中要重点关注哪些要素（叶金荣）

原文:http://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/CDKN_nPcIjzA_U5-xwAE5w 导读 EXPLAIN的结果中,有哪些关键信息值得注意呢? MySQL的EXPLAIN当然和ORACLE的没法比,不过我们从它输出的结果中,也可以得到很多有用的信息. 总的来说,我们只需要关注结果中的几列: 列名 备注 type 本次查询表联接类型,从这里可以看到本次查询大概的效率 key 最终选择的索引,如果没有索引的话,本次查询效率通常很差 key_len 本次查询用于结果过滤的索引实际长度

执行计划中cost计算方法

概念: blevel:二元高度=索引高度-1 clustering_factor:集群因子,扫描index scan得出的要扫描的表中block数,clustering_factor<=table blocks 索引扫描的计算公式: cost = blevel + ceil(leaf_blocks *effective index selectivity) + ceil(clustering_factor * effective table selectivity) SQL> select l

浅析SQL SERVER执行计划中的各类怪相

在查看执行计划或调优过程中,执行计划里面有些现象总会让人有些疑惑不解: 1:为什么同一条SQL语句有时候会走索引查找,有时候SQL脚本又不走索引查找,反而走全表扫描? 2:同一条SQL语句,查询条件的取值不同,它的执行计划会一致吗? 3: 同一条SQL语句,其执行计划会变化,为什么 4: 在查询条件的某个或几个字段上创建了索引,执行计划就一定会走该索引吗? 5:同时存在几个索引,SQL语句会走那个索引? ..............................................

也谈SQL Server 2008 处理隐式数据类型转换在执行计划中的增强

在 SQL Server 查询中,不经意思的隐匿数据类型转换可能导致极大的查询性能问题,比如一个看起来没有任何问题简单的条件:WHERE c = N'x' ,如果 c 的数据类型是 varchar,并且表中包含大量的数据,这个查询可能导致极大的性能开销,因为这个操作会导致列 c 的数据类型转换为 nvarchar与常量值匹配,在 SQL Server 2008 及之后的版本中,这种操作做了增强,一定程度上降低了性能开销,参考SQL Server 2008 处理隐式数据类型转换在执行计划中的增强