Deal of The Day! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions
Mail Us support@pass4success.com
Location US
Mob_nav_barsMENU

Snowflake ADA-C01 Exam - Topic 4 Question 12 Discussion

Actual exam question for Snowflake's ADA-C01 exam
Question #: 12
Topic #: 4
[All ADA-C01 Questions]

An Administrator is evaluating a complex query using the EXPLAIN command. The Globalstats operation indicates 500 partitionsAssigned.

The Administrator then runs the query to completion and opens the Query Profile. They notice that the partitions scanned value is 429.

Why might the actual partitions scanned be lower than the estimate from the EXPLAIN output?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: B

When future grants are defined on the same object type for a database and a schema in the same database, the schema-level grants take precedence over the database level grants, and the database level grants are ignored4. This behavior applies to privileges on future objects granted to one role or different roles4. Future grants allow defining an initial set of privileges to grant on new (i.e. future) objects of a certain type in a database or a schema3. As soon as the new objects are created inside the database or schema, the predefined set of privileges are assigned to the object automatically without any manual intervention3.


by Kristeen at Apr 26, 2024, 11:22 PM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium ADA-C01 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Submit Cancel
Justine
6 months ago
D could be a factor too, but I lean towards C for the win!
upvoted 0 times
...
Kasandra
6 months ago
B doesn't make sense to me, the micro-partitions shouldn't affect the scan count.
upvoted 0 times
...
Daisy
6 months ago
Wait, are we sure about the safety factor in A? Sounds a bit off.
upvoted 0 times
...
Linsey
7 months ago
Totally agree, C seems like the best answer here!
upvoted 0 times
...
Cary
7 months ago
I think runtime optimizations like join pruning can really cut down on partitions scanned.
upvoted 0 times
...
Michael
7 months ago
I vaguely recall something about in-flight data compression, but I'm not confident if that would really impact the partitions scanned like option D suggests.
upvoted 0 times
...
Barbra
7 months ago
I practiced a similar question where partition assignment was discussed, and I think option B could be a possibility too, but I'm leaning towards C.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lashawna
7 months ago
I'm not entirely sure, but I feel like the EXPLAIN command might include some safety factor, which could explain the difference in numbers.
upvoted 0 times
...
Leoma
8 months ago
I remember something about runtime optimizations affecting the number of partitions scanned, so I think option C might be correct.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ammie
8 months ago
This is a tricky one. I'm a bit confused by the different partition counts, but the option about runtime optimizations like join pruning sounds promising. I'll need to think through the details to make sure I understand what's going on.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ahmed
8 months ago
Alright, I've got a few ideas on this one. The safety factor in the EXPLAIN results could be one reason, or maybe the GlobalStats partition assignment includes some extra partitions that don't end up getting scanned. I'll need to weigh the options carefully.
upvoted 0 times
...
Emilio
8 months ago
Okay, let's see here. The question is asking why the actual partitions scanned would be lower than the EXPLAIN estimate. I'm not sure, but the options about runtime optimizations and data compression seem like they could be relevant.
upvoted 0 times
...
Osvaldo
8 months ago
Hmm, this is an interesting one. The EXPLAIN output shows a higher partition count than the actual query execution, so there must be some optimization happening. I'll need to think through the options carefully.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tijuana
8 months ago
Based on my understanding, the organization administrators are the ones who can fully configure the Okta AD Agents, so I'll go with option A.
upvoted 0 times
...
Kina
8 months ago
This seems like a straightforward copyright question. The student reproduced the poems in full, which is likely a violation of the writer's copyright.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tess
8 months ago
The owner of the file seems like the most logical answer, since that would determine the priority.
upvoted 0 times
...
Kristeen
8 months ago
Hmm, I'm a bit confused about the difference between "lest-Driven Development" and "Test-Driven Development". I'll need to double-check the terminology, but I think Option D sounds right.
upvoted 0 times
...
Marnie
8 months ago
Hmm, I'm not sure about this one. I'll have to think it through carefully.
upvoted 0 times
...
Corazon
1 year ago
Wait, so the EXPLAIN command is basically the database version of a crystal ball? Gotta love the unpredictability of technology.
upvoted 0 times
Felix
11 months ago
D) In-flight data compression will result in fewer micro-partitions being scanned at the virtual warehouse layer than were identified at the storage layer.
upvoted 0 times
...
Gayla
12 months ago
C) Runtime optimizations such as join pruning can reduce the number of partitions and bytes scanned during query execution.
upvoted 0 times
...
Mike
12 months ago
A) The EXPLAIN results always include a 10-15% safety factor in order to provide conservative estimates.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Andra
1 year ago
Micro-partitions, macro-problems. It's like a game of partition Tetris up in here.
upvoted 0 times
...
Arlette
1 year ago
Haha, a 10-15% safety factor? That's like the IT version of 'the dog ate my homework'.
upvoted 0 times
Svetlana
11 months ago
D) In-flight data compression will result in fewer micro-partitions being scanned at the virtual warehouse layer than were identified at the storage layer.
upvoted 0 times
...
Laurena
11 months ago
C) Runtime optimizations such as join pruning can reduce the number of partitions and bytes scanned during query execution.
upvoted 0 times
...
Doretha
12 months ago
A) The EXPLAIN results always include a 10-15% safety factor in order to provide conservative estimates.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Rikki
1 year ago
Ah, the classic partitions scanned mystery. Looks like runtime optimizations can make a real difference. I bet the data compression also plays a role.
upvoted 0 times
Lawrence
1 year ago
User 3: In-flight data compression might also play a role in scanning fewer micro-partitions at the virtual warehouse layer.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lawrence
1 year ago
User 2: Yeah, runtime optimizations can definitely reduce the number of partitions and bytes scanned during query execution.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jovita
1 year ago
User 1: I think the actual partitions scanned can be lower due to runtime optimizations like join pruning.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Mattie
1 year ago
The EXPLAIN command is great, but it seems like it's not always accurate. I wonder if there's a way to make the estimates more reliable.
upvoted 0 times
Lorrie
1 year ago
D) In-flight data compression will result in fewer micro-partitions being scanned at the virtual warehouse layer than were identified at the storage layer.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jacqueline
1 year ago
C) Runtime optimizations such as join pruning can reduce the number of partitions and bytes scanned during query execution.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Paz
1 year ago
I'm not sure, but I think D could also be a valid explanation. In-flight data compression could result in fewer partitions being scanned.
upvoted 0 times
...
Staci
1 year ago
I agree with Sina. Join pruning can definitely help in reducing the partitions scanned during query execution.
upvoted 0 times
...
Sina
1 year ago
I think the answer is C. Runtime optimizations can reduce the number of partitions scanned.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel