Ado.net performance:What does SNIReadSync do? - performance

We have a query that takes 2 seconds to run in Sql Server Management Studio but it takes 13 seconds to be shown on a client screen.
I used dotTrace to profile my source code and noticed there is this SNIReadSync method (part of ADO.net assemblies)that takes a lot of time to do its job(9 seconds).I ran my source over server so I could omit the network effects and the result was the same.
It doesn't matter if I'm using OleDBConnection or SqlConnection.
It doesn't matter if I'm using a DataReader or a DataSet.
Connection pooling does not solve this issue(as my result shows).
I googled this issue and I couldn't find an answer to the question that what this method is actually doing and how we can improve it.
here's what I found on StakOverFlow that's not helpful either:
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/1610874/snireadsync-executing-between-120-500-ms-for-a-simple-query-what-do-i-look-for

Ignoring SNIReadSync for a moment (I think this might be a red herring).
The symptoms you are describing sound like an incorrectly cached query plan.
Please update your statistics (or rebuild indexes) and see if it still occurs.

Related

Using tbl and src_monetdblite to access data

Sorry if this question has been asked elsewhere, I can't find it. I'm working through some basic examples in MonetDBLite.
> dbGetQuery(dbcon, "SELECT MAX(mpg) FROM mtcars WHERE cyl = 8")
L3
1 19.2
works, but
> ms <- MonetDBLite::src_monetdblite("./DB")
> t <- tbl(ms, "mtcars")
Error in UseMethod("tbl") :
no applicable method for 'tbl' applied to an object of class
"c('src_monetdb', 'src_sql', 'src')"
It seems that it's trying to assign the db to t not the table.
Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
I've been perusing resources and found a useR2016 presentation and noticed a difference here:
> ms
src: MonetDBEmbeddedConnection
tbls: mtcars
Curious...
I'm a huge fan of using MonetDBLite together with dplyr. My addition to Hannes Mühleisen's (thanks for the package!) answer would be that it appears that the order you load the packages can matter. Loading MonetDBLite after dplyr and dbplyr seems to be the key for me. Loading MonetDBLite first causes errors similar to the one nzgwynn noted.
Sometimes I could connect to the database with no problems. Other times I would get error messages like:
Error in UseMethod("db_query_fields") : no applicable method for 'db_query_fields' applied to an object of class "MonetDBEmbeddedConnection"
Like nzgwynn, I was puzzled about why it would work sometimes but not others. Restarting and reinstalling wouldn't necessarily fix it for me.
This clue, from an issue filed about sparklyr, lead me to explore the package loading order:
https://github.com/rstudio/sparklyr/issues/38
Like noted there with sparklyr, and I've noticed with other R database packages, MonetDBLite will load and attach automatically if the Global Environment already contains a connection object. My problem was that I had an src_monetdb object in my workspace, which was causing MonetDBLite to load upon starting RStudio. So I while I thought I was loading it after dplyr and dbplyr, it was really loading first. If I clear the workspace and then restart, I can load the packages in the preferred order. So far, this method has worked.
I've seen starting with a clean workspace advised as good practice generally, e.g.: https://twitter.com/hadleywickham/status/561146907519500288. Starting with a fresh workspace loses you no time either given MonetDBLite's speedy query ability.
Lastly, I would put a enthusiastic pitch in for using MonetDBLite. I saw it mentioned on RStudio's database page and was immediately impressed on how easy it was to setup and how fast it is. It's the best way I've found for working with a ~2 GB dataset in R. When exploring the data interactively, the dplyr queries run so quickly that it feels like I'm working with the data in memory. And if all I want to do is load the whole dataset into memory, MonetDBLite is as fast or faster than other methods I've tried like read.fst() from the fst package.
I closed R and opened it again and the same coding worked fine...
You need to call library("dplyr") before using tbl and friends. Also make sure you have dbplyr installed.
Update: Also, please make sure there is no connection object (src) in a stored workspace loaded at startup. Loading connections from .Rdata files does not work! Instead, create the connection/src from scratch every time you run a script.

executePackage seems to take a long time to launch subpackage

I am a relative beginner at SSIS so I may be doing something silly.
I have a process that involves looping over a heterogenous queue and processing the objects 1 at a time. The process is currently being done in 'set logic' and its dropping stuff. I was asked to rework it in a looping manner, so that decision has been made for me.
I have chosen to implement queue logic in 1 package and the actual processing in another package.
This is all going relatively well considering...
I now have the process up and running, but its slow. 9 seconds per item. Clearly I cant present this solution. :-)
One thing i notice, 1.5 - 2 seconds of each loop are on the ExecutePackage Task in the queue loop.
I cant figure out how to get a hard number, I am using the flashing green box method of performance tuning. The other steps seem to be very fast. Adding indexes, changing sql to sps, all the usual tricks have helped.
Is the UI realiable at all with regards to boxes turning white/yellow/green? Some tasks report times in the progress tab, some dont seem to. So I am counting yellow time.
Should calling a subpackage be that expensive? 1 change i made was I change 'RunInASeparateProcess' to FALSE. I did that because the subpackage produces the following message otherwise:
Error: 0xC0012024 at Script Task: The task "Script Task" cannot run on this edition of Integration Services. It requires a higher level edition.
Task failed: Script Task
The reading i have done seems to advocate multiple packages. Anyone have any counter patterns? Should i stay the course? I started changing to 1 package. Copy/paste doesnt seem to work well w/ SequenceContainers. I would also need to recreate all the variables in the parent package. Doable, but im not sure that is the answer.
Does anyone know of any tuning resources/websites/books they would be willing to share.
Update - I have been tearing things down in an effort to figure out what the problem is. I was thinking it was the package configurations passing variable values. I dont think that is it. I can pass variables to another package w/ nothing in it and it is fast.
I can make the trivial subpackage slow by adding the two connection managers to it.
I suddenly realize I may be making and breaking a connection to both an Oracle Server and a SQL server in both the main package and then the sub package.
Am I correct in this observation?
Is there any way I can reuse the connection between the two packages?
When i google it, most of what i see is suggestions for passing the connection string.
UPDATE - I combined the two packages into one. This performance is not about 1.25 seconds per item, down from about 9. the only thing i can point to that changed is i am now reusing a single connection instead of making multiple connections.
Thanks, I appreciate any help you are kind enough to offer.
Greg
Once you enable logging, I'd suggest running the package from a command window using dtexec. While that doesn't perfectly duplicate the server environment, it does have the advantages of (a) eliminating BIDS as a potential performance issue and (b) being something you can do without jumping through change control hoops.

Please explain this behaviour (is LINQ cached)?

I recently added the wonderful MiniProfiler package to my project and it helped me a lot to improve page render speed.
Now I notice the following. Every first request to a page takes a significant longer time in SQL than subsequent visits.
Here's an example:
First visit:
Second and later visits:
Is this caused by some sort of caching in LINQ or on SQL Server? I'm using .NET 4 and LINQ-to-SQL with default settings in my dbml file.
There are a lot of things that can affect the performance of a first hit. The jitter might have to do some work, and various levels of caching might come into play.
That said, SQL Server has very advanced caching features. It's not at all unusual for repeat queries against the server to be much faster than the initial query.

RavenDB - slow write/save performance?

I started porting a simple ASP.NET MVC web app from SQL to RavenDB. I noticed that the pages were faster on SQL than on RavenDB.
Drilling down with Miniprofiler it seems the culprit is the time it takes to do: session.SaveChanges (150-220ms). The code for saving in RavenDB looks like:
var btime = new TimeData() { Time1 = DateTime.Now, TheDay = new DateTime(2012, 4, 3), UserId = 76 };
session.Store(btime);
session.SaveChanges();
Authentication Mode: When RavenDB is running as a service, I assume it using "Windows Authentication". When deployed as an IIS application I just used the defaults - which was "Windows Authentication".
Background: The database machine is separate from my development machine which acts as the web server. The databases are running on the same database machine. The test data is quite small - say 100 rows. The queries are simple returning an object with 12 properties 48 bytes in size. Using fiddler to run a WCAT test against RavenDB generated higher utilization on the database machine (vs SQL) and far fewer pages. I tried running Raven as a service and as an IIS application, but didn't see a noticible difference.
Edit
I wanted to ensure it wasn't a problem with a) one of my machines or b) the solution I created. So, decided to try testing it on Appharbor using another solution created by Michael Friis: RavenDN sample app and simply add Miniprofiler to that solution. Michael is one of the awesome guys at Apharbor and you can download the code here if you want to look at it.
Results from Appharbor
You can try it here (for now):
Read: (7-12ms with a few outliers at 100+ms).
Write/Save: (197-312ms) * WOW that's a long time to save *. To test the save, just create a new "thingy" and save it. You might want to do it at least twice since the first one usually takes longer as the application warms up.
Unless we're both doing something wrong, RavenDB is very slow to save - around 10-20x slower to save than read. Given that it re-indexes asynchronously, this seems very slow.
Are there ways to speed it up or is this to be expected?
First - Ayende is "the man" behind RavenDB (he wrote it). I have no idea why he's not addressing the question, although even in the Google groups, he seems to chime in once to ask some pointed questions, but rarely comes back to provide a complete answer. Maybe he's working hard to to get RavenHQ off the ground?!?
Second - We experienced a similar problem. Below's a link to a discussion on Google Groups that may be the cause:
RavenDB Authentication and 401 Response.
A reasonable question might be: "If these recommendations fix the problem, why doesn't RavenDB work that way out of the box?" or at least provide documentation about how to get decent write performance.
We played for a while with the suggestions that were made in the thread above and the response-time did improve. In the end though, we switched back to MySQL because it's well-tested, we ran into this problem early (luckily) which caused concern that we might hit more problems and, finally, because we did not have the time to:
fully test whether it fixed the performance problems we saw on the RavenDB Server
investigate and test the implications of using UnsafeAuthenticatedConnectionSharing & pre-authentication.
To summarize Ayende's response you're actually testing the summation of network latency and authentication chatter. As Joe pointed out there's ways you can optimize the authentication to be less chatty. This does however arguably reduce security, clearly Microsoft built security to be secure first and performance secondary. You as the user of RavenDB can choose if the default security model is too robust as it arguably is for protected server-to-server communication.
RavenDB is clearly defined to be READ orientated. 10-20x slower for writes than reads is entirely acceptable because writes are full ACID and transactional.
If write speed is your limiting factor with RavenDB you've likely not modeled transaction boundaries properly. That you are saving documents that are too similar to RDBMS table rows and not actually well modeled documents.
Edit: Reading your question again and looking into the background section, you explicitly define your test conditions to be an optimal scenario for SQL Server while being one of the least efficient methods for RavenDB. For data that size, that's almost certainly 1 document if it would be real world usage.

ORA-03113 while executing a sql query

I have a 400 line sql query which is throwing exception withing 30 seconds
ORA-03113: end-of-file on communication channel
Below are things to note:
I have set the timeout as 10 mins
There is one last condition when removed resolves this error.
This error came only recently when I analyzed indexes.
The troubling condition is like this:
AND UPPER (someMultiJoin.someColumn) LIKE UPPER ('%90936%')
So my assumption is that the query is getting terminated from the server side apparently because its identified as a resource hog.
Is my assumption appropriate ? How should I go about to fix this problem ?
EDIT: I tried to get the explain plan of faulty query but the explain plan query also gives me an ORA-03113 error. I understand that my query is not very performant but why should that be a reason for ORA-03113 error. I am trying to run the query from toad and there are no alert log or trace generated, my db version is
Oracle9i Enterprise Edition Release 9.2.0.7.0 - Production
One possible cause of this error is a thread crash on the server side. Check whether the Oracle server has generated any trace files, or logged any errors in its alert log.
You say that removing one condition from the query causes the problem to go away. How long does the query take to run without that condition? Have you checked the execution plans for both versions of the query to see if adding that condition is causing some inefficient plan to be chosen?
I've had similar connection dropping issues with certain variations on a query. In my case connections dropped when using rownum under certain circumstances. It turned out to be a bug that had a workaround by adjusting a certain Oracle Database configuration setting. We went with a workaround until a patch could be installed. I wish I could remember more specifics or find an old email on this but I don't know that the specifics would help address your issue. I'm posting this just to say that you've probably encountered a bug and if you have access to Oracle's support site (support.oracle.com) you'll likely find that others have reported it.
Edit:
I had a quick look at Oracle support. There are more than 1000 bugs related to ORA-03113 but I found one that may apply:
Bug 5015257: QUERY FAILS WITH ORA-3113 AND COREDUMP WHEN QUERY_REWRITE_ENABLED='TRUE'
To summarize:
Identified in 9.2.0.6.0 and fixed in 10.2.0.1
Running a particular query
(not identified) causes ORA-03113
Running explain on query does the
same
There is a core file in
$ORACLE_HOME/dbs
Workaround is to set
QUERY_REWRITE_ENABLED to false: alter
system set query_rewrite_enabled =
FALSE;
Another possibility:
Bug 3659827: ORA-3113 FROM LONG RUNNING QUERY
9.2.0.5.0 through 10.2.0.0
Problem: Customer has long running query that consistently produces ORA-3113 errros.
On customers system they receive core.log files but do not receive any errors
in the alert.log. On test system I used I receivded ORA-7445 errors.
Workaround: set "_complex_view_merging"=false at session level or instance level.
You can safely remove the "UPPER" on both parts if you are using the like with numbers (that are not case sensitive), this can reduce the query time to check the like sentence
AND UPPER (someMultiJoin.someColumn) LIKE UPPER ('%90936%')
Is equals to:
AND someMultiJoin.someColumn LIKE '%90936%'
Numbers are not affected by UPPER (and % is independent of character casing).
From the information so far it looks like an back-end crash, as Dave Costa suggested some time ago. Were you able to check the server logs?
Can you get the plan with set autotrace traceonly explain? Does it happen from SQL*Plus locally, or only with a remote connection? Certainly sounds like an ORA-600 on the back-end could be the culprit, particularly if it's at parse time. The successful run taking longer than the failing one seems to rule out a network problem. I suspect it's failing quite quickly but the client is taking up to 30 seconds to give up on the dead connection, or the server is taking that long to write trace and core files.
Which probably leaves you the option of patching (if you can find a relevant fix for the specific ORA-600 on Metalink) or upgrading the DB; or rewriting the query to avoid it. You may get some ideas for how to do that from Metalink if it's a known bug. If you're lucky it might be as simple as a hint, if the extra condition is having an unexpected impact on the plan. Is someMultiJoin.someColumn part of an index that's used in the successful version? It's possible the UPPER is confusing it and you could persuade it back on to the successful plan by hinting it to use the index anyway, but that's obviously rather speculative.
It means you have been disconnected. This not likely to be due to being a resource hog.
I have seen where the connection to the DB is running over a NAT and because there is no traffic it closes the tunnel and thus drops the connection. Generally if you use connection pooling you won't get this.
As #Daniel said, the network connection to the server is being broken. You might take a look at End-of-file on communication channel to see if it offers any useful suggestions.
Share and enjoy.
This is often a bug in the Cost Based Optimizer with complex queries.
What you can try to do is to change the execution plan. E.g. use WITH to pull some subquerys out. Or use the SELECT /*+ RULE */ hint to prevent Oracle from using the CBO. Also dropping the statistics helps, because Oracle then uses another execution plan.
If you can update the database, make a test installation of 9.2.0.8 and see if the error is gone there.
Sometimes it helps to make a dump of the schema, drop everything in it and import the dump again.
I was having the same error, in my case what was causing it was the length of the query.
By reducing said length, I had no more problems.

Resources