Skip to main content

Does the PL/SQL compiler remove code that is used?

Yes. No. Sort of.

 It's (not all that) complicated.

This question hit my Twitter feed yesterday:
When you enable all warnings, have you ever seen a "PLW-06006-- uncalled procedure removed" (lots of them), when they surely are called?
Now that, I must admit, has to be a little bit concerning. You write code, you know it is going to, or should be, executed, and yet the PL/SQL compiler tells you it's been removed?

OK, OK, calm down. Everything is just fine.

Here's the explanation:
  • The optimizer performed an inlining optimization, so all the code for that procedure (or function) was moved to where it is invoked.
  • The "original" nested or private subprogram that you wrote (and, don't worry, is still and always will be in the source code of your program unit) is, truth be told, never going to be called. 
  • So then the compiler removed it (did not include it in the compiled code - which is not PL/SQL code any longer).
Let's take a look at some code, and what happens when we run it (you can see this for yourselves via my LiveSQL script):
ALTER SESSION SET plsql_optimize_level = 3
/

Statement processed

ALTER SESSION SET plsql_warnings='enable:all'
/

Statement processed

CREATE OR REPLACE PROCEDURE show_inlining
   AUTHID DEFINER
IS
   FUNCTION f1 (p NUMBER)
      RETURN PLS_INTEGER
   IS
   BEGIN
      RETURN p * 10;
   END;

   FUNCTION f2 (p BOOLEAN)
      RETURN PLS_INTEGER
   IS
   BEGIN
      RETURN CASE WHEN p THEN 10 ELSE 100 END;
   END;

   FUNCTION f3 (p PLS_INTEGER)
      RETURN PLS_INTEGER
   IS
   BEGIN
      RETURN p * 10;
   END;
BEGIN
   DBMS_OUTPUT.put_line ('f1 called: ' || f1 (1));

   PRAGMA INLINE (f2, 'YES');
   DBMS_OUTPUT.put_line ('f2 called: ' || TO_CHAR (f2 (TRUE) + f2 (FALSE)));

   PRAGMA INLINE (f3, 'NO');
   DBMS_OUTPUT.put_line ('f3 called: ' || f3 (55));
END;
/

Warning: PROCEDURE SHOW_INLINING
Warning: PROCEDURE SHOW_INLINING 
Line/Col: 4/4 PLW-06027: procedure "F1" is removed after inlining 
Line/Col: 10/4 PLW-06027: procedure "F2" is removed after inlining 
Line/Col: 22/4 PLW-06005: inlining of call of procedure 'F1' was done 
Line/Col: 25/4 PLW-06005: inlining of call of procedure 'F2' was done 
Line/Col: 25/4 PLW-06004: inlining of call of procedure 'F2' requested 
Line/Col: 25/4 PLW-06005: inlining of call of procedure 'F2' was done 
Line/Col: 25/52 PLW-06004: inlining of call of procedure 'F2' requested 
Line/Col: 28/4 PLW-06008: call of procedure 'F3' will not be inlined

BEGIN
   show_inlining;
END;
/

f1 called: 10
f2 called: 110
f3 called: 550
Please note: all the functions (f1 - f3) were executed!

As you can see, the warnings feedback ("PLW" stands for PL/SQL Warning) tells the story: procedures are removed after inlining.

Though I suppose we could be a little more explicit - and reassuring - and say:
PLW-06027: procedure "F1" is removed after inlining....
but just from the compiled code, not the source code of your program unit!

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Quick Guide to User-Defined Types in Oracle PL/SQL

A Twitter follower recently asked for more information on user-defined types in the PL/SQL language, and I figured the best way to answer is to offer up this blog post. PL/SQL is a strongly-typed language . Before you can work with a variable or constant, it must be declared with a type (yes, PL/SQL also supports lots of implicit conversions from one type to another, but still, everything must be declared with a type). PL/SQL offers a wide array of pre-defined data types , both in the language natively (such as VARCHAR2, PLS_INTEGER, BOOLEAN, etc.) and in a variety of supplied packages (e.g., the NUMBER_TABLE collection type in the DBMS_SQL package). Data types in PL/SQL can be scalars, such as strings and numbers, or composite (consisting of one or more scalars), such as record types, collection types and object types. You can't really declare your own "user-defined" scalars, though you can define subtypes  from those scalars, which can be very helpful from the p...

Three tips for getting started right with Oracle Database development

By "Oracle Database development", I mean, more or less, writing SQL and PL/SQL. I assume in this post that you have access to Oracle Database (which you can get via Cloud services, Docker , GitHub and OTN ). A. Use a powerful IDE, designed with database programming in mind. There are lots of editors out there, and many IDEs that work with Oracle Database. Sure, you could use Notepad, but OMG the productivity loss. You could also use a popular editor like Sublime, and then it get it working with Oracle. I suggest, however, that you  download  and install Oracle's own own, free, powerful IDE: SQL Developer . If you like to complement your graphical IDE with a command line tool (or OMG if you actually prefer  a command line tool to a graphical interface), you should also check out the relatively new and generating-lots-of-excitement SQLcl . B. Enable compile-time warnings and PL/Scope. The database has tons of useful functionality burned right into it, ready for...

Why DBMS_OUTPUT.PUT_LINE should not be in your application code

A database developer recently came across my  Bulletproof PL/SQL  presentation, which includes this slide. That first item in the list caught his attention: Never put calls to DBMS_OUTPUT.PUT_LINE in your application code. So he sent me an email asking why I would say that. Well, I suppose that is the problem with publishing slide decks. All the explanatory verbiage is missing. I suppose maybe I should do a video. :-) But in the meantime, allow me to explain. First, what does DBMS_OUTPUT.PUT_LINE do? It writes text out to a buffer, and when your current PL/SQL block terminates, the buffer is displayed on your screen. [Note: there can be more to it than that. For example, you could in your own code call DBMS_OUTPUT.GET_LINE(S) to get the contents of the buffer and do something with it, but I will keep things simple right now.] Second, if I am telling you not to use this built-in, how could text from your program be displayed on your screen? Not without a lot o...