在oracle世界,你可以使用:
1)case表达式 或者
2)decode函数
来实现逻辑判断。Oracle的DECODE函数功能很强,灵活运用的话可以避免多次扫描,从而提高查询的性能。而CASE是9i以后提供的语法,这个语法更加的灵活,提供了IF THEN ELSE的功能。
case表达式
case表达式,可分两种,简单和搜索,简单case后接表达式,如:
对于简单的case需要几点注意:
1)寻找when的优先级:从上到下
2)再多的when,也只有一个出口,即其中有一个满足了expr就马上退出case
3)不能把return_expr和else_expr指定为null,而且,expr、comparison_expr和return_expr的数据类型必须相同。
搜索case:
CASE WHEN condition THEN return_expr
[WHEN condition THEN return_expr]
...
ELSE else_expr
END
例子:
SELECT (CASE WHEN cust_credit_limit BETWEEN 0 AND 3999 THEN \' 0 - 3999\'
WHEN cust_credit_limit BETWEEN 4000 AND 7999 THEN \' 4000 - 7999\'
WHEN cust_credit_limit BETWEEN 8000 AND 11999 THEN \' 8000 - 11999\'
WHEN cust_credit_limit BETWEEN 12000 AND 16000 THEN \'12000 - 16000\' END)
AS BUCKET, COUNT(*) AS Count_in_Group
FROM customers WHERE cust_city = \'Marshal\' GROUP BY
(CASE WHEN cust_credit_limit BETWEEN 0 AND 3999 THEN \' 0 - 3999\'
WHEN cust_credit_limit BETWEEN 4000 AND 7999 THEN \' 4000 - 7999\'
WHEN cust_credit_limit BETWEEN 8000 AND 11999 THEN \' 8000 - 11999\'
WHEN cust_credit_limit BETWEEN 12000 AND 16000 THEN \'12000 - 16000\' END);
BUCKET COUNT_IN_GROUP
------------- --------------
0 - 3999 8
4000 - 7999 7
8000 - 11999 7
12000 - 16000 1
用decode可以违反第3NF(行不可再分,列不可再分,列不可重复):列重复
hr@ORCL> select * from a;
ID NAME
---------- ----------
1 a
2 b
3 c
1 a
hr@ORCL> select sum(decode(id,1,1,0)) think,
2 sum(decode(id,2,2,0)) water,
3 sum(decode(id,3,3,0)) linshuibin
4 from a;
THINK WATER LINSHUIBIN
---------- ---------- ----------
2 2 3
一个字段,decode函数可以完全改写简单case;
多个字段,需要复杂的case,方可。
语法:
DECODE(value,if1,then1,if2,then2,if3,then3,...,else),表示如果value等于if1时,DECODE函数的结果返then1,...,如果不等于任何一个if值,则返回else。可以用函数或表达式来替代value,if,then,else从而作出一些更有用的比较。
来看看具体的运用:
1 假设我们想给百度职员加工资,其标准是:工资在8000元以下的将加20%;工资在8000元以上的加15%
则:
select decode(sign(salary - 8000),1,salary*1.15,-1,salary*1.2,salary) "revised_salary" from employee
2 表table_subject,有subject_name列。要求按照:语、数、外的顺序进行排序
则:
select * from table_subject order by decode(subject_name, \'语文\', 1, \'数学\', 2, , \'外语\',3)
decode和简单case的性能比较
Oracle的DECODE函数功能很强,灵活运用的话可以避免多次扫描,从而提高查询的性能。而CASE是9i以后提供的语法,这个语法更加的灵活,提供了IF THEN ELSE的功能。
对于很多情况,DECODE和CASE都能解决问题,个人更倾向于使用DECODE,一方面是从8i保留下来的习惯,另一方面是DECODE的语法更加的简洁,代码量要小一些。
不过今天在看Oracle9i的数据仓库手册时发现,Oracle在文档中提到CASE语句的效率会更高一些,尤其是CASE表达式 WHEN 常量 THEN的语法,效率要比CASE WHEN表达式 THEN的语法更高一些。对于后面这种说法倒是没有太多的疑问,对于CASE比DECODE效率高这种说法倒是第一次看到,印象中DECODE效率很高,应该不会比CASE的效率差。
到底效率如何,还是要具体的实例来说:
SQL> CREATE TABLE T AS
2 SELECT A.*
3 FROM DBA_OBJECTS A, DBA_MVIEWS;
Table created.
SQL> SELECT COUNT(*) FROM T;
COUNT(*)
----------
6075760
下面检查DECODE和两种CASE语句的效率:
SQL> SET ARRAY 1000
SQL> SET TIMING ON
SQL> SET AUTOT TRACE
SQL> SELECT DECODE(OWNER, \'SYSTEM\', \'SYSTEM\', \'SYS\', \'SYSTEM\', \'USER\')
2 FROM T;
6075760 rows selected.
Elapsed: 00:00:07.24
Execution Plan
----------------------------------------------------------
Plan hash value: 1601196873
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id | Operation | Name | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
| 0 | SELECT STATEMENT | | 4245K| 68M| 13828 (1)| 00:03:14 |
| 1 | TABLE ACCESS FULL| T | 4245K| 68M| 13828 (1)| 00:03:14 |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note
-----
- dynamic sampling used for this statement
Statistics
----------------------------------------------------------
0 recursive calls
0 db block gets
47551 consistent gets
0 physical reads
0 redo size
46288564 bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
67317 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
6077 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
0 sorts (memory)
0 sorts (disk)
6075760 rows processed
SQL> SELECT CASE OWNER WHEN \'SYSTEM\' THEN \'SYSTEM\'
2 WHEN \'SYS\' THEN \'SYSTEM\'
3 ELSE \'USER\' END
4 FROM T;
6075760 rows selected.
Elapsed: 00:00:07.22
Execution Plan
----------------------------------------------------------
Plan hash value: 1601196873
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id | Operation | Name | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
| 0 | SELECT STATEMENT | | 4245K| 68M| 13828 (1)| 00:03:14 |
| 1 | TABLE ACCESS FULL| T | 4245K| 68M| 13828 (1)| 00:03:14 |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note
-----
- dynamic sampling used for this statement
Statistics
----------------------------------------------------------
0 recursive calls
0 db block gets
47551 consistent gets
0 physical reads
0 redo size
46288578 bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
67317 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
6077 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
0 sorts (memory)
0 sorts (disk)
6075760 rows processed
SQL> SELECT CASE WHEN OWNER = \'SYSTEM\' THEN \'SYSTEM\'
2 WHEN OWNER = \'SYS\' THEN \'SYSTEM\'
3 ELSE \'USER\' END
4 FROM T;
6075760 rows selected.
Elapsed: 00:00:07.23
Execution Plan
----------------------------------------------------------
Plan hash value: 1601196873
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id | Operation | Name | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
| 0 | SELECT STATEMENT | | 4245K| 68M| 13828 (1)| 00:03:14 |
| 1 | TABLE ACCESS FULL| T | 4245K| 68M| 13828 (1)| 00:03:14 |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note
-----
- dynamic sampling used for this statement
Statistics
----------------------------------------------------------
0 recursive calls
0 db block gets
47551 consistent gets
0 physical reads
0 redo size
46288585 bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
67317 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
6077 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
0 sorts (memory)
0 sorts (disk)
6075760 rows processed
测试结果确实是CASE的简单表达式写法效率最高,然后是CASE的另一种写法,DECODE效率最低。但是对于600W的记录,最终结果只有0.01到0.02秒的查询,实在没有办法得出上面的结论,因为这个差别实在是太小,以至于任何其他的一些影响都足以改变测试结果,如要一定要得出结论,那么结论就是3种方式的效率基本相同。
不过由于CASE表达式更加灵活,使得以前DECODE必须运用的一些技巧得以简化,这时使用CASE方式,确实可以得到一些性能上的提高,比如:
SQL> SELECT DECODE(SIGN(OBJECT_ID), 1, \'+\', -1, \'-\', \'0\')
2 FROM T;
6075760 rows selected.
Elapsed: 00:00:04.94
Execution Plan
----------------------------------------------------------
Plan hash value: 1601196873
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id | Operation | Name | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
| 0 | SELECT STATEMENT | | 4245K| 52M| 13840 (1)| 00:03:14 |
| 1 | TABLE ACCESS FULL| T | 4245K| 52M| 13840 (1)| 00:03:14 |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note
-----
- dynamic sampling used for this statement
Statistics
----------------------------------------------------------
0 recursive calls
0 db block gets
47551 consistent gets
0 physical reads
0 redo size
31491431 bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
67317 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
6077 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
0 sorts (memory)
0 sorts (disk)
6075760 rows processed
SQL> SELECT CASE WHEN OBJECT_ID > 0 THEN \'+\'
2 WHEN OBJECT_ID < 0 THEN \'-\'
3 ELSE \'0\' END
4 FROM T;
6075760 rows selected.
Elapsed: 00:00:04.60
Execution Plan
----------------------------------------------------------
Plan hash value: 1601196873
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id | Operation | Name | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
| 0 | SELECT STATEMENT | | 4245K| 52M| 13840 (1)| 00:03:14 |
| 1 | TABLE ACCESS FULL| T | 4245K| 52M| 13840 (1)| 00:03:14 |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note
-----
- dynamic sampling used for this statement
Statistics
----------------------------------------------------------
0 recursive calls
0 db block gets
47551 consistent gets
0 physical reads
0 redo size
31491449 bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
67317 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
6077 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
0 sorts (memory)
0 sorts (disk)
6075760 rows processed
这里CASE带来性能提升的主要原因实际上是CASE避免了SIGN函数的调用,而并不是CASE本身的性能要高于DECODE,事实上如果这里使用SIGN并利用CASE的所谓高效语法:
SQL> SELECT CASE SIGN(OBJECT_ID) WHEN 1 THEN \'+\'
2 WHEN -1 THEN \'-\'
3 ELSE \'0\' END
4 FROM T;
6075760 rows selected.
Elapsed: 00:00:04.97
Execution Plan
----------------------------------------------------------
Plan hash value: 1601196873
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id | Operation | Name | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
| 0 | SELECT STATEMENT | | 4245K| 52M| 13840 (1)| 00:03:14 |
| 1 | TABLE ACCESS FULL| T | 4245K| 52M| 13840 (1)| 00:03:14 |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note
-----
- dynamic sampling used for this statement
Statistics
----------------------------------------------------------
0 recursive calls
0 db block gets
47551 consistent gets
0 physical reads
0 redo size
31491445 bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
67317 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
6077 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
0 sorts (memory)
0 sorts (disk)
6075760 rows processed
可以看到,这时效率比DECODE还低。
根据上面的测试可以得出结论,无论是DECODE还是CASE方式的两种写法,执行效率没有明显的差别。
转载于:http://blog.itpub.net/26515977/viewspace-1207725/