Sonarqube totals wrong - sonarqube

Sonarqube is showing incorrect total for projects and issues.
Total projects says 4 however there are only 2. Claims there are 78 bugs but there are none, and none get displayed in the results section. (see below)
I've checked the database a grouping the [projects] table by [project_uuid] only returns 2 rows.
Sonarqube v6.2 is being used, with an SQL Server database if that makes any difference. Could this be a setup issue, I only setup this instance a few days ago but I am not sure where to check other than the database where the projects table at least.

When your issue counts are scrambled like this, it means the ElasticSearch index is corrupted.
shut the server down
delete $SONARQUBE_HOME/data/es
start the server back up
Startup will take a little longer because there's an added delay while the index is rebuilt. The duration of this delay is dependent on the size of your instance.
Once your server comes back up, your numbers should be right.

Related

Oracle SQL Developer - Array Fetch Size

I thought for sure this would be an easy issue, but I haven't been able to find anything. In SQL Server SSMS, if I run a SQL Statement, I get back all the records of that query, but in Oracle SQL Developer, I apparently can get back at most, 200 records, so I cannot really test the speed or look at the data. How can I increase this limit to be as much as I need to match how SSMS works in that regard?
I thought this would be a quick Google search to find it, but it seems very difficult to find, if it is even possible. I found one aricle on Stack Overflow that states:
You can also edit the preferences file by hand to set the Array Fetch Size to any value.
Mine is found at C:\Users<user>\AppData\Roaming\SQL
Developer\system4.0.2.15.21\o.sqldeveloper.12.2.0.15.21\product-preferences.xml on Win 7 (x64).
The value is on line 372 for me and reads
I have changed it to 2000 and it works for me.
But I cannot find that location. I can find the SQL Developer folder, but my system is 19.xxxx and there is no corresponding file in that location. I did a search for "product-preferences.xml" and couldn't find it in the SQL Developer folder. Not sure if Windows 10 has a different location.
As such, is there anyway I can edit a config file of some sort to change this setting or any other way?
If you're testing execution times you're already good. Adding more rows to the result screen is just adding fetch time.
If you want to add fetch time to your testing, execute the query as a script (F5). However, this still has a max number of rows you can print to the screen, also set in preferences.
Your best bet I think is the AutoTrace feature. You can tell it to fetch all the rows, you'll also get a ton of performance metrics and the actual execution plan.
Check that last box
Then use this button to run the scenario

access-2013 report opens very slow

I've a weird problem here with a report which I use every day.
I've moved from XP to WIN-7 some time ago and use access 2013.
(Language is german, so sorry I can only guess how the modes are called in english)
"Suddenly" (I really can't say when this started) opening the report in "report-view" takes VERY long. Around 1 minute, or so. Then, switching to "page-view" and formatting the report takes only 2 or 3 seconds. Switching back to report-view, again takes 1 minute.
The report has a complex Query as datasource. (In fact, a UNION of 8 sub-queries) Opening the this query displays the data after 1 second which is ok.
All tables are "linked" from the same ODBC Datasource, which points to a mysql server on our network.
Further testing I opened every table the queries use, one after another. I noticed that opening these tables takes around 9 seconds for every single table. It doesn't matter if it's a small or big table. Always these 9 seconds.
The ODBC datasource is defined using the IP address of the server, not the name. So I consider it not being a nameserver problem / timeout/ ...
What could cause this slowdown on opening tables ????
I'm puzzeled..
Here are a few steps I would try:
Taking a fresh copy of the Access app running on one of those "fast clients" and see if that solves the issue
try comparing performance with a fast client after setting the same default printer
check the version of the driver on both machines, and if you rely on a DSN, compare them

Google Analytics: incorrect number of sessions when grouping by Custom Dimension

For a while I have successfully queried the number of sessions for my website, including the number of sessions per 'Lang Code' and per 'Distribution Channel'; both Custom Dimensions I have created in Analytics with their own slot and their Scope Type set to 'Session'.
Recently the number of sessions has decreased significantly when I group by a Custom Dimension, e.g. Lang Code.
The following query gives me a number of say 900:
https://ga-dev-tools.appspot.com/query-explorer/?start-date=2015-10-17&end-date=2015-10-17&metrics=ga%3Asessions
Whereas this query gives returns around a quarter of that, say ~220:
https://ga-dev-tools.appspot.com/query-explorer/?start-date=2015-10-17&end-date=2015-10-17&metrics=ga%3Asessions&dimensions=ga%3Adimension14
Now, my initial reaction was that 'Lang Code' was not set on all pages but I checked and this data is includes guaranteed on all pages of my website.
Also, no changes have been made to the Analytics View I'm querying.
The same issue occurred a couple of weeks ago and at the time I fixed this by changing the Scope Type of said Custom Dimensions to Session, but now I'm no longer sure if this was the correct fix or if this was just a temporary glitch since:
the issue didn't occur before
the issue now reoccurs
Does anyone have any idea what may have caused this data discrepancy?
P.S. to make things stranger, for daily reporting we run this query every night (around 2am), and then the numbers are actually correct, so apparently it makes a difference at what time the query is executed?

Server issue when searching Oracle database

I have a JEE application searching a large Oracle databse for data. The application uses JDBC to query the database.
The issue I am having is that the results page is unable to be displayed. I get the following error:
The connection to the server was reset while the page was loading.
This happens after 60 seconds. When I run the sql query manually using a SQL client, the results return in 3 seconds.
I have checked the logs and there are no exceptions that I can see.
Do any of you know the best way to find what is causing the connection to be reset? If I break my search date range into 2, and search both ranges individually, both return results. So it seems that it's the larger result set causing the issue.
Any help is welcome.
You are probably right about the larger result set. Often when running a query from a SQL client, you'll get the first set of records right away. If you page down to force pull of all records, then it bogs down. Perhaps your hitting the same issue with JDBC client where it takes more than 60 sec to get all the rows. I've not done JDBC in a while, but can you get it to stream the result set?
Regards,
Roger
All views are mine ...

Fast query runs slow in SSRS

I have an SSRS report that calls out to a stored procedure. If I run the stored procedure directly from a query window, it will return in under 2 seconds. However, the same query run from an 2005 SSRS report takes up to 5 minutes to complete. This is not just happening on the first run, it happens every time. Additionally, I don't see this same problem in other environments.
Any ideas on why the SSRS report would run so slow in this particular environment?
Thanks for the suggestions provided here. We have found a solution and it did turn out to be related to the parameters. SQL Server was producing a convoluted execution plan when executed from the SSRS report due to 'parameter sniffing'. The workaround was to declare variables inside of the stored procedure and assign the incoming parameters to the variables. Then the query used the variables rather than the parameters. This caused the query to perform consistently whether called from SQL Server Manager or through the SSRS report.
I will add that I had the same problem with a non-stored procedure query - just a plain select statement. To fix it, I declared a variable within the dataset SQL statement and set it equal to the SSRS parameter.
What an annoying workaround! Still, thank you all for getting me close to the answer!
Add this to the end of your proc: option(recompile)
This will make the report run almost as fast as the stored procedure
I had the same problem, here is my description of the problem
"I created a store procedure which would generate 2200 Rows and would get executed in almost 2 seconds however after calling the store procedure from SSRS 2008 and run the report it actually never ran and ultimately I have to kill the BIDS (Business Intelligence development Studio) from task manager".
What I Tried: I tried running the SP from reportuser Login but SP was running normal for that user as well, I checked Profiler but nothing worked out.
Solution:
Actually the problem is that even though SP is generating the result but SSRS engine is taking time to read these many rows and render it back.
So I added WITH RECOMPILE option in SP and ran the report .. this is when miracle happened and my problem got resolve.
I had the same scenario occuring..Very basic report, the SP (which only takes in 1 param) was taking 5 seconds to bring back 10K records, yet the report would take 6 minutes to run. According to profiler and the RS ExecutionLogStorage table, the report was spending all it's time on the query. Brian S.'s comment led me to the solution..I simply added WITH RECOMPILE before the AS statement in the SP, and now the report time pretty much matches the SP execution time.
I simply deselected 'Repeat header columns on each page' within the Tablix Properties.
If your stored procedure uses linked servers or openquery, they may run quickly by themselves but take a long time to render in SSRS. Some general suggestions:
Retrieve the data directly from the server where the data is stored by using a different data source instead of using the linked server to retrieve the data.
Load the data from the remote server to a local table prior to executing the report, keeping the report query simple.
Use a table variable to first retrieve the data from the remote server and then join with your local tables instead of directly returning a join with a linked server.
I see that the question has been answered, I'm just adding this in case someone has this same issue.
I had the report html output trouble on report retrieving 32000 lines. The query ran fast but the output into web browser was very slow. In my case I had to activate “Interactive Paging” to allow user to see first page and be able to generate Excel file. The pros of this solution is that first page appears fast and user can generate export to Excel or PDF, the cons is that user can scroll only current page. If user wants to see more content he\she must use navigation buttons above the grid. In my case user accepted this behavior because the export to Excel was more important.
To activate “Interactive Paging” you must click on the free area in the report pane and change property “InteractiveSize”\ “Height” on the report level in Properties pane. Set this property to different from 0. I set to 8.5 inches in my case. Also ensure that you unchecked “Keep together on one page if possible” property on the Tablix level (right click on the Tablix, then “Tablix Properties”, then “General”\ “Page Break Options”).
I came across a similar issue of my stored procedure executing quickly from Management Studio but executing very slow from SSRS. After a long struggle I solved this issue by deleting the stored procedure physically and recreating it. I am not sure of the logic behind it, but I assume it is because of the change in table structure used in the stored procedure.
I Faced the same issue. For me it was just to unckeck the option :
Tablix Properties=> Page Break Option => Keep together on one page if possible
Of SSRS Report. It was trying to put all records on the same page instead of creating many pages.
Aside from the parameter-sniffing issue, I've found that SSRS is generally slower at client side processing than (in my case) Crystal reports. The SSRS engine just doesn't seem as capable when it has a lot of rows to locally filter or aggregate. Granted, these are result set design problems which can frequently be addressed (though not always if the details are required for drilldown) but the more um...mature...reporting engine is more forgiving.
In my case, I just had to disconnect and connect the SSMS. I profiled the query and the duration of execution was showing 1 minute even though the query itself runs under 2 seconds. Restarted the connection and ran again, this time the duration showed the correct execution time.
I was able to solve this by removing the [&TotalPages] builtin field from the bottom. The time when down from minutes to less than a second.
Something odd that I could not determined was having impact on the calculation of total pages.
I was using SSRS 2012.
Couple of things you can do, without executing the actual report just run the sproc from within the data tab of reporting services. Does it still take time?
Another option is to use SQL Profiler and determine what is coming in and out of the database system.
Another thing you can do to test it, so to recreate a simple report without any parameters. Run the report and see if it makes a difference. It could be that your RS report is corrupted or badly formed that may cause the rendering to be really slow.
Had the same problem, and fixed it by giving the shared dataset a default parameter and updating that dataset in the reporting server.
DO you use "group by" in the SSRS table?
I had a report with 3 grouped by fields and I noticed that the report runed very slowly despite having a light query, to the point where I can't even dial values in the search field.
Than I removed the groupings and now the report goes up in seconds and everything works in an instant.
In our case, no code was required.
Note from our Help Desk: "Clearing out your Internet Setting will fix this problem."
Maybe that means "clear cache."

Resources