Decode函数使用:

Oracle 的decode函数蛮有意思,是oracle独有的,国际标准SQL中并没有decode函数。

语法

DECODE(col|expression, search1, result1

[, search2, result2,...,]

[, default])

例子

SELECT product_id,
DECODE (warehouse_id, 1, 'Southlake',
2, 'San Francisco',
3, 'New Jersey',
4, 'Seattle',
'Non domestic') "Location"
FROM inventories
WHERE product_id < 1775
ORDER BY product_id, "Location";

从上面简单的语法和例子中可以看出decode函数也可以做判断,可以实现case…when…then…else..end 和 if..then..else..end if 同样的功能。

Decode函数优点:

1、  DECODE函数可以避免重复扫描相同记录或重复连接相同的表,从而减少数据处理时间

例如:想要统计scott用户下emp表中部门20和部门30各有多少员工,每个部门工资成本。

 

SELECT COUNT(*),
          SUM(SAL) FROM EMP WHERE DEPTNO = 20;
   SELECT COUNT(*),
          SUM(SAL) FROM EMP WHERE DEPTNO = 30;
上面的语句可以合并成一条可以达到同样的目的
SELECT COUNT(DECODE(DEPTNO,20,'X',NULL)) D20_COUNT,
        COUNT(DECODE(DEPTNO,30,'X',NULL)) D30_COUNT,
        SUM(DECODE(DEPTNO,20,SAL,NULL)) D20_SAL,
        SUM(DECODE(DEPTNO,30,SAL,NULL)) D30_SAL
FROM EMP;

2、  简化了代码

上面的例子如果使用case when 来实现写起来会多写一些代码

SELECT product_id,
Case warehouse_id
    When 1 then 'Southlake'
    When 2 then 'San Francisco'
         When 3 then 'New Jersey'
         When 4 then 'Seattle'
           Else  'Non domestic'
 End as "Location"
FROM inventories
WHERE product_id < 1775
ORDER BY product_id, "Location";

建议:如果只是简单的判断使用decode函数简单明了

Decode函数性能对比case when性能

  If..then..end if是一种落后的判断方式,这里不做对比了。

经常在网上看到说使用某个函数或者某种写法效率怎么怎么高,执行效率如何还是得具体测试:

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 statementStatistics

----------------------------------------------------------

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 processedSQL> 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 statementStatistics

----------------------------------------------------------

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 processedSQL> 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 statementStatistics

----------------------------------------------------------

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 statementStatistics

----------------------------------------------------------

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 processedSQL> 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 statementStatistics

----------------------------------------------------------

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 statementStatistics

----------------------------------------------------------

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。

 

总结

 

1、  case语句和decode函数执行效率方面

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。

2、  代码实现方面

使用DECODE函数可以避免重复扫描相同记录或重复连接相同的表,从而减少数据处理时间。

如果只是简单的判断使用decode函数简单明了。

 

以上文档测试并整理自互联网

官方参考文档:

Oracle® Database

SQL Language Reference

11g Release 2 (11.2)

E17118-04

5 FUNCTIONSàDECODE