DB2 - Problem description
Problem IC97986 | Status: Closed |
OPTIMIZER MIGHT FAVOUR HSJOIN OVER AN ORDERED NLJOIN | |
product: | |
DB2 FOR LUW / DB2FORLUW / A50 - DB2 | |
Problem description: | |
The optimizer might favour a hash join (HSJOIN) over a nested loop join (NLJOIN) alternative under the following conditions: - the join is on two or more columns - both tables in the join have an index with leading, non-bound key columns that participate in the join - one or more leading columns match in order of the join columns, but not all For example, consider the following query SELECT * FROM T1,T2 WHERE T1.A=T2.A and T1.B=T2.B and T1.C=T2.C and T1.X=1; where index IX1 is defined on T1(X,A,C,B) and index IX2 is defined on T2(A,B,C). The column T1.X is bound to the constant 1 as a result of the predicate "T1.X=1" so for the NLJOIN with IX1 access on the outer and IX2 access on the inner, the leading non-bound columns for both indexes are referenced in the join predicate T1.A=T2.A, but the subsequent columns are not ordered in join column order. Under these conditions, the optimizer might over estimate the cost of the NLJOIN alternative, favouring a possibly worse-performing HSJOIN alternative | |
Problem Summary: | |
**************************************************************** * USERS AFFECTED: * * ALL * **************************************************************** * PROBLEM DESCRIPTION: * * See Error Description * **************************************************************** * RECOMMENDATION: * * Upgrade to DB2 Cancun Release 10.5.0.4 * **************************************************************** | |
Local Fix: | |
Create an index on either table, ensuring that the key columns are in join order. Referring to the example in the Error Description, this could be achieved by creating an index on T2(A,C,B). | |
available fix packs: | |
DB2 Cancun Release 10.5.0.4 (also known as Fix Pack 4) for Linux, UNIX, and Windows | |
Solution | |
First fixed in DB2 Cancun Release 10.5.0.4 | |
Workaround | |
See Local Fix | |
Timestamps | |
Date - problem reported : Date - problem closed : Date - last modified : | 27.11.2013 06.10.2014 06.10.2014 |
Problem solved at the following versions (IBM BugInfos) | |
Problem solved according to the fixlist(s) of the following version(s) | |
10.5.0.4 |