Top 60 Oracle Blogs

Recent comments


Why Why Why Why?

Here’s a little puzzle – and if you don’t see the answer almost immediately you did need to read this note. The question comes from a thread on the Oracle Groundbreakers’ Forum –

“Why I am getting 0020 instead of 2020 for below query?”

select to_char(to_date(sysdate,'dd-mm-yyyy'),'iyyy') from dual.

Instead of sysdate if I give date like ‘5-dec-2020’ it’s giving correct. Any ideas why iso value for sysdate year is coming as 0020?

Direct Path

This is a little addendum to a note I wrote a couple of days ago about serial direct path reads and KO (fast object checkpoint) enqueue waits.

The original note was prompted by a problem where someone had set the hidden parameter “_serial_direct_read” to ‘always’ because there were running 11g and wanted some “insert as select” statements to use direct path reads on the select portion and 11g wasn’t co-operating.

Serial direct path reads were introduced as a possibility in (at least) the timeline, but the parameter was set to false until 11gR2 where it changed to auto. (Legal values are: false, true, never, auto, always.)

Direct Path

Here’s a note that I might have written once already – but I can’t find it and I’ve just been reminded about what it (might have) said by a posting that came up on the Oracle database forum in the last few days.

The posting in question is asking why, after setting the hidden parameter _serial_direct_read to ‘always’ a particular query is now taking hours to complete when it used to complete in a minute or so.

Tracing Errors

This is a little lesson in trouble-shooting. It assumes you have the privilege to generate and edit trace files, and all I’m going to do is show how I worked out the answer to a fairly simple question that appeared recently on the Oracle Developer Community forum in a thread with the title  Cannot drop table after start dropping unused columns checkpoint.

I have a table t1 which is reasonably large (1M rows) with a column v30, and I’ve issued the command.

Flashback Bug

Here’s a problem with the “flashback versions” technology that showed up at the end of last week. There’s a thread about it on the Oracle Developer community forum, and a chain of tweets that was my initial response to a twitter alert about it that Daniel Stein posted.

The problem appears somewhere in the 18c timeline – it doesn’t seem to be present in – so if you’re running any versions 18+ here’s a modified version of the test case supplied by Daniel Stein to demonstrate the issue.

Explain Rewrite

This is one of those notes that I thought I’d written years ago. It answers two questions:

  • what can I do with my materialized view?
  • why isn’t the optimizer using my materialized view for query rewrite?

I’ve actually supplied an example of code to address the first question as a throwaway comment in a blog that dealt with a completely different problem, but since the two questions above go together, and the two answers depend on the same package, I’m going to repeat the first answer.

The reason for writing this note now is that the question “why isn’t this query using my materialized view” came up on the Oracle Developer community forum a few days ago – and I couldn’t find the article that I thought I’d written.

Case and Aggregate bug

The following description of a bug appeared on the Oracle Developer Community forum a little while ago – on an upgrade from 12c to 19c a query starting producing the wrong results on a simple call to the average() function. In fact it turned out to be a bug introduced in

The owner of the thread posted a couple of zip files to build a test case – but I had to do a couple of edits, and change the nls_numeric_characters to ‘,.’ in order to get past a formatting error on a call to the to_timestamp() function. I’ve stripped the example to a minimum, and translated column name from German (which was presumably the source of the nls_numeric_characters issue) to make it easier to demonstrate and play with the bug.

Execution Plans

This is an example from the Oracle Developer Community of using the output of SQL Monitor to detect a problem with object statistics that resulted in an extremely poor choice of execution plan.

A short time after posting the original statement of the problem the OP identified where he thought the problem was and the general principle of why he thought he had a problem – so I didn’t have to read the entire execution plan to work out a strategy that would be (at least) a step in the right direction of solving the performance problem.

This note, then, is just a summary of the five minute that I spent confirming the OP’s hypothesis and explaining how to work around the problem he had identified. It does, however, give a little lead-in to the comments I made to the OP in order to give a more rounded picture of what his execution plan wass telling us.

Analytic cost error

Here’s a surprising costing error that was raised on the Oracle Developer Forum a few days ago. There’s a glitch in the cost atributed to sorting when an analytic over() clause – with corresponding “window sort” operation – makes a “sort order by” operation redundant. Here’s a script to generate the data set I’ll use for a demonstration with a template for a few queries I’ll be running against the data.