I run a complex query against Oracle DB 11G based eBS R12 schema:
For first run it takes 4 seconds. If I run it again, it takes 9, next 30 etc.
If I add "and 1=1" it takes 4 seconds again, then 9, the 30 and so on.
Quick workaraound is that we added a random generated "and sometstring = somestring" and now the results are always in 4 second.
I have never encoutered a query that would behave this way (it should be opposite, or no siginificat change between executions). We tested it on 2 copies of same DB, same behaviour.
How to debug it? And what internal mechanics could be getting confused?
UPDATE 1:
EXPLAIN PLAN FOR
(my query);
SELECT * FROM table(DBMS_XPLAN.DISPLAY);
Is exactly the same before first run that it is for subsequent ones. see http://pastebin.com/dMsXmhtG
Check the DBMS_XPLAN.DISPLAY_CURSOR. The reason could be cardinality feedback or other adaptive techniques Oracle uses. You should see multiple child cursors related to SQL_ID of your query and you can compare their plans.
Has your query bound variables and columns used for filtering histograms? This could be another reason.
Sounds like you might be suffering from adaptive cursor sharing or cardinality feedback. Here is an article showing how to turn them off - perhaps you could do that and see if the issue stops happening, as well as using #OldProgrammer's suggestion of tracing what is happening.
If one of these is found to be the problem, you can then take the necessary steps to ensure that the root cause (eg. incorrect statistics, unnecessary histograms, etc.) is corrected.
Related
i try to tune an existing View. I'm sorry for not posting an example but i failed to replicate the Problem. And i can't understand the behavior.
My View (View A) based on another view (View b) and a Table (Table C). In the select list some fields of these and some Package calls are used.
The runtime of a specific Select is nearly 32 seconds.
I analyzed the Statement and startet to optimize View b. I droped all columns i don't need in View a and reduced the overhead of the View b.
After this the select on View a was 5 seconds faster. I executed the select multiple times to get a valid average execute time, to be sure.
A Few minutes later i axecuted the Statement again and i got 32 Seconds. I executed this multiple times but it won't become faster.
There is no trafic on this database, the amount of data didn't change. And this is, until now, the first statement i have problems with getting reasonable results will analyzing the statment.
The Explainplan, I watched first, looks fine. No Full Table Scan (I know FTS is not overall bad). I have no idea why the executetime is so unstable, this made it hard to optimize the View and compare the results.
I think this sounds like a dump question, but i can't see the problem or have an idea what to do next.
Thanks and sorry for my bad english.
Unstable execute time
1) Did you clean up buffer cache between select statements?
2) In some situation you can improve your function and views with result_cacheing. But you have to figure out if it is applicable for your problem? (long story about resultchahe)[http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/articles/datawarehouse/vallath-resultcache-rac-284280.html]
The situation is simple, there is a table in oracle used as a "shared table" for data exchange. The table structure and number of records remains unchanged. In normal case, I continuously update data into this table and other process read this table for current data.
Strange thing is, when my process starts, the time consumption of each update statement execution is approximately 2 ms. And after a certain peroid of time(like 8 hours), the time consumption increased to 10 ~ 20 ms per statement. It makes the procedure quite slow.
the structure of table
and the update statement is like:
anaNum = anaList.size();
qry.prepare(tr("update YC set MEAVAL=:MEAVAL, QUALITY=:QUALITY, LASTUPDATE=:LASTUPDATE where YCID=:YCID"));
foreach(STbl_ANA ana, anaList)
{
qry.bindValue(":MEAVAL",ana.meaVal);
qry.bindValue(":QUALITY",ana.quality);
qry.bindValue(":LASTUPDATE",QDateTime::fromTime_t(ana.lastUpdate));
qry.bindValue(":YCID",ana.ycId);
if(!qry.exec())
{
qWarning() << QObject::tr("update yc failed, ")
<< qry.lastError().databaseText() << qry.lastError().driverText();
failedAnaList.append(ana);
}
}
the update statement using qt interface
There is many reasons which can cause orcle opreation slowd down, but I cannot find a clue to explain this.
I never start a transaction manually in qt code, which means the commit operation is executed every time after update statement.
The update frequency is about 200 records per second, but the number is dynamically changed by time. It maybe increase to 1000 in one time and drop to 10 in next time.
once the time consumption up to 10 ~ 20 ms per statement, it'll never dorp down. time consumption can be restored to 2ms only be restart oracle service.(it's useless to shutdown or restart any user process which visit orcle)
Please tell me how to solve it or at least what to be examined.
Good starting points is to check the AWR and ASH reports.
Comparing the reports in "good" and "bad" times you can spot the cause of the change. This can be for example a change of an execution plan or increase of wait events. One possible outcome is that only change you see is that the database is waiting more time on the client (i.e. the problem is not in the DB).
Anyway as diagnosed in other answer, the root cause of problems seems to be the update in a loop. If your update lists are long (say more that 10-100 entries) you can profit by updating the whole list in a single statement using MERGE.
build a collection from your list
cast the collection as TABLE
use this table in a MERGE statement to update the rows.
See here for details.
You can trace the session while it is running quickly and again later when it is running slowly. Use the sql trace functionality and tkprof to get a breakdown of where the update is spending its time in each case and see what has changed.
https://docs.oracle.com/cd/E25178_01/server.1111/e16638/sqltrace.htm#i4640
If you need help interpreting the results you can update your question or ask a new one.
Secondly, as a rule single record updates are not the best way to do updates in Oracle. Since you have many records to update already prepared before you prepare the query, look at execBatch.
https://doc.qt.io/qt-4.8/qsqlquery.html#execBatch
This will both execute the update faster and only issue a single commit.
Not sure if this question has been already asked. I face this problem where the 1st hit from the website to an Oracle SP takes a lot of time. Subsequent accesses work just fine.
The SP i'm taking about here is a dynamic SP used for Search functionality(With different search criteria selection option available)
1st access time ~200 seconds
subsequent access time ~20 to 30 seconds.
Stored Procedure logic on a high level.
Conditional JOINS are appended based on some logics.
Dynamic SQL and cursor used to retrieve data.
Any help to start tackling these kind of issues is very helpful..
Thanks,
Adarsh
The reason why it takes only a few secs to execute the query after the first run is that Oracle caches the results. If you change the SQL then Oracle considers it a different query and won't serve the results from the cache but executes the new query (even formatting the code again or adding a space in between will be a difference).
It is a hard question how to speed up first execution. You'll need to post your query and explain plan and probably you'll have to answer further questions if you want to get help on that.
I have a vey huge query. It is rather large, so i will not post it here(it has 6 levels of nested queries with ordering and grouping). Query has 2 parameters that are passed to it via PreparedStatement.setString(index, value). When I execute my query through SQL Developer(replacing query parameters to actual values before it by hand) the query runs about 10 seconds and return approximately 15000 rows. But when I try to run it through java program using PreparedStament with varibales it fails with ORA-01652(unable to extend temp segment). I have tried to use simple Statement from java program - it works fine. Also when I use preparedStatement without variables(don't use setString(), but specify parameters by hand) it works fine too.
So, I suspect that problem is in PreparedStatemnt parameters.
How does the mechanism of that parameters work? Why simple statement works fine but prepared one fails?
You're probably running into issues with bind variable peeking.
For the same query, the best plan can be significantly different depending on the actual bind variables. In 10g, Oracle builds the execution plan based on the first set of bind variables used. 11g mostly fixed this problem with adaptive cursor sharing, a feature that creates multiple plans for different bind variables.
Here are some ideas for solving this problem:
Use literals This isn't always as bad as people assume. If the good version of your query runs in 10 seconds, the overhead of hard-parsing the query will be negligible. But you may need to be careful to avoid SQL injection.
Force a hard-parse There are a few ways to force Oracle to hard-parse every query. One method is to call DBMS_STATS with NO_INVALIDATE=>FALSE on one of the tables in the query.
Disable bind-variable peeking / hints You can do this by removing the relevant histograms, or using one of the parameters in the link provided by OldProgrammer. This will stabilize your plan, but will not necessarily pick the correct plan. You may also need to use hints to pick the right plan. But then you may not have the right plan for every combination of inputs.
Upgrade to 11g This may not be an option, but this issue is another good reason to start planning an upgrade.
I am trying to understand the performance of a query that I've written in Oracle. At this time I only have access to SQLDeveloper and its execution timer. I can run SHOW PLAN but cannot use the auto trace function.
The query that I've written runs in about 1.8 seconds when I press "execute query" (F9) in SQLDeveloper. I know that this is only fetching the first fifty rows by default, but can I at least be certain that the 1.8 seconds encompasses the total execution time plus the time to deliver the first 50 rows to my client?
When I wrap this query in a stored procedure (returning the results via an OUT REF CURSOR) and try to use it from an external application (SQL Server Reporting Services), the query takes over one minute to run. I get similar performance when I press "run script" (F5) in SQLDeveloper. It seems that the difference here is that in these two scenarios, Oracle has to transmit all of the rows back rather than the first 50. This leads me to believe that there is some network connectivity issues between the client PC and Oracle instance.
My query only returns about 8000 rows so this performance is surprising. To try to prove my theory above about the latency, I ran some code like this in SQLDeveloper:
declare
tmp sys_refcursor;
begin
my_proc(null, null, null, tmp);
end;
...And this runs in about two seconds. Again, does SQLDeveloper's execution clock accurately indicate the execution time of the query? Or am I missing something and is it possible that it is in fact my query which needs tuning?
Can anybody please offer me any insight on this based on the limited tools I have available? Or should I try to involve the DBA to do some further analysis?
"I know that this is only fetching the
first fifty rows by default, but can I
at least be certain that the 1.8
seconds encompasses the total
execution time plus the time to
deliver the first 50 rows to my
client?"
No, it is the time to return the first 50 rows. It doesn't necessarily require that the database has determined the entire result set.
Think about the table as an encyclopedia. If you want a list of animals with names beginning with 'A' or 'Z', you'll probably get Aardvarks and Alligators pretty quickly. It will take much longer to get Zebras as you'd have to read the entire book. If your query is doing a full table scan, it won't complete until it has read the entire table (or book), even if there is nothing to be picked up in anything after the first chapter (because it doesn't know there isn't anything important in there until it has read it).
declare
tmp sys_refcursor;
begin
my_proc(null, null, null, tmp);
end;
This piece of code does nothing. More specifically, it will parse the query to determine that the necessary tables, columns and privileges are in place. It will not actually execute the query or determine whether any rows meet the filter criteria.
If the query only returns 8000 rows it is unlikely that the network is a significant problem (unless they are very big rows).
Ask your DBA for a quick tutorial in performance tuning.