This discussion is archived
10 Replies Latest reply: Feb 27, 2013 6:36 AM by Jonathan Lewis RSS

insert and delete

just a DBA Newbie
Currently Being Moderated
I would like to clarify the situation.

1. create table t1 as select * from t2.
2. delete from t1.

Why second statement is several times slower than insert if it just moves the same amount of data into undo segments ?
  • 1. Re: insert and delete
    Dave Rabone Journeyer
    Currently Being Moderated
    What data do you need to undo an insert? No data, just the rowid that was created.

    What data do you need to undo a delete? The complete row.
  • 2. Re: insert and delete
    Mihael Pro
    Currently Being Moderated
    SQL> truncate table q;
    SQL> insert into q select * from dba_objects ;
    
    Statistics
    ---------------------------------------------------
             62  recursive calls
           9017  db block gets
           2716  consistent gets
              3  physical reads
        7636776  redo size   
          64851  rows processed
          
    
    SQL> delete from q;
    
    Statistics
    ---------------------------------------------------
             22  recursive calls
          72934  db block gets
           1072  consistent gets
              0  physical reads
       25324064  redo size
          64851  rows processed
    See difference in redo size.
  • 3. Re: insert and delete
    just a DBA Newbie
    Currently Being Moderated
    What data do you need to undo an insert? No data, just the rowid that was created.

    What data do you need to undo a delete? The complete row.
    But "complete row" is inserted also to data tablespace.
  • 4. Re: insert and delete
    Dave Rabone Journeyer
    Currently Being Moderated
    ... and that at first glance is counterintuitive because the reverse argument should apply to redo, until you recognize that undo is also protected by redo.
  • 5. Re: insert and delete
    just a DBA Newbie
    Currently Being Moderated
    Dave Rabone wrote:
    ... and that at first glance is counterintuitive because the reverse argument should apply to redo, until you recognize that undo is also protected by redo.
    Sorry, not clear. For example, 'Insert' inserts 100 Mbytes to data segments. 'Delete' just moves this data into undo. Why redo is so different?
  • 6. Re: insert and delete
    Dave Rabone Journeyer
    Currently Being Moderated
    Because the operations that change both the undo segments and data segments that are also recorded in redo.

    Go back and reread the concepts guide (several times) and understand the beautifully elegant way that the undo mechanism provides read consistency, rollback and statement level flashback and the redo mechanism gives recovery capabilities against software and hardware failure.

    The key thing is that data and undo segments use the same recovery mechanism, the redo.
  • 7. Re: insert and delete
    Fran Guru
    Currently Being Moderated
     'Delete' just moves this data into undo
    No, both, Redo and undo are generated with insert and delete. Redo and Undo, are blocks and works equally.

    The undo generated will be enough information to make the data "go away", the redo generated will be enough information to make the insert "happen again".

    In your example, imagine that you create the new table inserting data from other table. Your table haven't anything "before" so undo is less than redo. When you delete the table, you have info "before" and "data to save" for "re-write" the table.

    The delete makes more undo information because it has "before" data. That's why it need more time to finish.


    from:
    http://www.google.es/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=insert%20redo&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&ved=0CD4QFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fasktom.oracle.com%2Fpls%2Fapex%2Fz%3Fp_url%3DASKTOM.download_file%253Fp_file%253D1435150530862588762%26p_cat%3Dundo_redo.pdf%26p_company%3D822925097021874&ei=45wsUcDpKIuJhQfYroDQDQ&usg=AFQjCNFtDLW6XvP2aDN8zDCPki92UcK95A&bvm=bv.42965579,d.ZG4
  • 8. Re: insert and delete
    just a DBA Newbie
    Currently Being Moderated
    Good document, but it doesn't explain in detail.
    For example, 'insert' inserts 100Mb into data blocks. Undo size for this is small, assume, 1Mb. So total redo will be about 101Mb.
    'Delete' just copies these 100Mb blocks into undo segments and marks data blocks as free. So total redo should be also about 100Mb ?! But it is several times more! Why?
  • 9. Re: insert and delete
    Mihael Pro
    Currently Being Moderated
    For example, 'insert' inserts 100Mb into data blocks. Undo size for this is small, assume, 1Mb. So total redo will be about 101Mb.
    'Delete' just copies these 100Mb blocks into undo segments and marks data blocks as free. So total redo should be also about 100Mb ?! But it is several times more! Why?
    1.When you insert rows, database populates data blocks. In this case size of redo will be about size of inserted blocks plus some small amount of undo blocks.
    2.When you delete rows, database does not just copy original rows to undo, but creates undo records. Undo record for delete contains before images for all columns and is larger in size that usual data record. Therefore total amount of undo blocks will be more than total data blocks.
    3.When you update rows, redo will include undo records and new data. The more columns are updated, the larger size of undo record and more new data. Therefore update operation can even generate more redo than delete. Updating all columns will generate almost the same redo as for delete + insert.
  • 10. Re: insert and delete
    Jonathan Lewis Oracle ACE Director
    Currently Being Moderated
    just a DBA wrote:
    Dave Rabone wrote:
    ... and that at first glance is counterintuitive because the reverse argument should apply to redo, until you recognize that undo is also protected by redo.
    Sorry, not clear. For example, 'Insert' inserts 100 Mbytes to data segments. 'Delete' just moves this data into undo. Why redo is so different?
    There's an optimisation that Oracle can use on the insert that it doesn't use on the delete.
    Imagine you insert 80,000 rows of 100 bytes each - for a total of about 80MB raw data, with 80 rows per block, 1,000 blocks.

    On the insert Oracle can optimise the undo and redo sizes by creating "array based" undo records and redo vectors, so the overheads amount to about 200 or so bytes per block in the table.

    On the delete this optimisation doesn't apply - so the overheads amount to about 200 or so bytes per row.

    If you check your figures you'll probably see that the difference in redo is about 200 to 250 bytes per row inserted.

    Regards
    Jonathan Lewis

Legend

  • Correct Answers - 10 points
  • Helpful Answers - 5 points