On May 7, 11:29 am, joel garry <joel-ga...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> Well, maybe something else is going on, like applying some semantics
> to every row... been too long since I worked with this stuff to do
> anything but guess.
>
> jg
> --
> @[EMAIL PROTECTED]
is bogus.
> Now not only do you drop your keys or phone in the toilet, it
> automatically flushes if you stand up to get them.
Thanks for the update, I was wondering the same thing e.g. if running
in linguistic mode was dramatically increasing the cost of any index
comparison. Almost smells like he's running a regex or something
instead of some form of bitwise compare (pure specualation on my
part).
Main thing that's bugging me is that running in nls_mode, even with
nls_indexes, seems to utterly torch my performance (order of magnitude
slower). I've seen a number of other comments out of the web to the
effect of "oh, yea, don't use nls mode, performance sucks".
All the Oracle doc though seems to be saying "use nls mode, it's a
wonderful feature that we're recommending".
I can't seem to find any kind of official statement from Oracle as to
whether I should *expect* bad performance like this in nls mode, or if
this is a bug I'm hitting, or if I'm doing something wrong.
At this point, I've tentatively decided that performance in nls mode
is just plain bad and there's nothing I can do about it other than
running the session in nls_comp=binary mode and using lower() on my
various query terms to get the right results back (in us english at
least). I'd love to be proven wrong here though.
|
