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.
Related
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.
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 have a stored procedure that returns about 50000 records in 10sec using at most 2 cores in SSMS. The SSRS report using the stored procedure was taking 20min and would max out the processor on an 8 core server for the entire time. The report was relatively simple (i.e. no graphs, calculations). The report did not appear to be the issue as I wrote the 50K rows to a temp table and the report could display the data in a few seconds. I tried many different ideas for testing altering the stored procedure each time, but keeping the original code in a separate window to revert back to. After one Alter of the stored procedure, going back to the original code, the report and server utilization started running fast, comparable to the performance of the stored procedure alone. Everything is fine for now, but I am would like to get to the bottom of what caused this in case it happens again. Any ideas?
I'd start with a SQL Profiler trace of both the stored procedure when you execute it normally, and then the same SP when it's called by SSRS. Make sure you include the execution plans involved, so you can see if it's making some bad decisions (though that seems unlikely - the SQL Server should execute an optimal - or at least consistent - plan regardless of the query's source).
We used to have cases where Business Objects would execute stored procs dozens of times for no aparent reason and it lead to occasionally horrible performance, though I've never seen that same behavior with SSRS. It may be somewhere to start, though. You'll also see the execution begin/end times - that will make it clear if it's the database layer that's hanging up, or if the SQL Server hands back the data in 10 seconds and then it's the SSRS service that's choking somewhere.
The primary solution to speeding SSRS reports is to cache the reports. If one does this (either my preloading the cache at 7:30 am for instance) or caches the reports on-hit, one will find massive gains in load speed.
You may also find that monthly restarts of SSRS application domain to resolve your issue.
Please note that I do this daily and professionally and am not simply waxing poetic on SSRS
Caching in SSRS
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms155927.aspx
Pre-loading the Cache
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms155876.aspx
If you do not like initial reports taking long and your data is static i.e. a daily general ledger or the like, meaning the data is relatively static over the day, you may increase the cache life-span.
Finally, you may also opt for business managers to instead receive these reports via email subscriptions, which will send them a point in time Excel report which they may find easier and more systematic.
You can also use parameters in SSRS to allow for easy parsing by the user and faster queries. In the query builder type IN(#SSN) under the Filter column that you wish to parameterize, you will then find it created in the parameter folder just above data sources in the upper left of your BIDS GUI.
[If you do not see the data source section in SSRS, hit CTRL+ALT+D.
See a nearly identical question here: Performance Issuses with SSRS
I have a report engine, performing PreparedStatements on Oracle 11, that is a highly prioritized task.
What I see is that first query invocation usually performs much much longer than the same query afterwards (query has different parameters and return different data).
I suppose this is due to hard parsing done by Oracle, on first query invocation.
I wonder, is there a way of hinting to Oracle, that this query is highly prioritized query which would be performed often, and which performance is critical, so it should remain in shared pool, no matter what?
I know that I can fix execution plan in Oracle 11, but I don't want to fix it, I want Oracle still to be able to change it, as system changes, all I want is to exclude query hard parsing.
Perhaps you should change your "I suppose..." into a "I tested and have determined..." :)
The query performance may be affected by more than just parsing; when it executes it has to fetch blocks from disk into the buffer cache - subsequent executions quite possibly are taking advantage of the blocks being found in memory and so are faster.
EDIT: to answer your immediate question - a workaround may be to have a job run periodically that parses the query but doesn't execute it. You might even be able to use this to determine whether parsing or fetching is the locus of the problem.
You can try pinning to shared pool using dbms_shared_pool.keep
But I would first make sure that you have an aging out problem first
Anton,
if your query is using bind variables it will be re-used. The cursor will be cached and as long as it is re-used, it will remain in the cursor cache. Make sure that it uses bind variables. This increases re-usability and scalability.
If you don't trust the rdbms you can pin it using dbms_shared_pool.keep.
See http://psoug.org/reference/dbms_shared_pool.html
You need to find your cursor in order to do so.
Normally there is an other problem that should be fixed.
Ronald.
http://ronr.blogspot.com
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.