"Don Vaillancourt" <donv@webimpact.com> wrote in message
news:hYpvh.49785$43.43940@nnrp.ca.mci.com!nnrp1.uunet.ca...
> Here's an oversimplified version of a query that I'm writing and wanted to
> know if there are any performance differences between the two versions.
>
>
> select *
> from table_a a , table_b b
> where a.col_1 = b.col_1
> and a.col_1 = 1000
>
>
> versus
>
>
> select *
> from table_a a , table_b b
> where a.col_1 = 1000
> and b.col_1 = 1000
>
> All the tests show that they run at the same speed. But I have a very
> large query that joins 5 tables together and I'm trying to get as much out
> of it as possible. Currently it runs at 2 seconds which I really don't
> like and would like to get it at under 1 second. So I'm looking for every
> little bit.
>
> I've already removed the DISTINCT, which in my test case doesn't do
> anything, but still took up one second.

> Here's an oversimplified version of a query that I'm writing and wanted
> to know if there are any performance differences between the two versions.
>
>
> select *
> from table_a a , table_b b
> where a.col_1 = b.col_1
> and a.col_1 = 1000
>
>
> versus
>
>
> select *
> from table_a a , table_b b
> where a.col_1 = 1000
> and b.col_1 = 1000
>
> All the tests show that they run at the same speed. But I have a very
> large query that joins 5 tables together and I'm trying to get as much
> out of it as possible. Currently it runs at 2 seconds which I really
> don't like and would like to get it at under 1 second. So I'm looking
> for every little bit.