I posted earlier about my SQL statement that overnight went from less than
2 minutes to about 25 minutes on our nightly data warehouse loads.   We
used RMAN to move an exact copy of the database from before the process
started running long to a different unix box.   After running sql_trace and
tkprof on the SQL statement in question (see below) on both the current and
pre-problem database, the execution times were similar and the explain
plans were identical except for minor differences in the number of rows
returned.

I then looked at all of the initialization parameters and they look the
same except that we created the rman copy with a smaller shared pool (due
to resource constraints on the box we moved the copy to).

One thing that I noticed was that the extent sizes for the TEMP tablespace
is different.   The day that we started having this problem, we had a disk
failure.   The TEMP tablespace was on the failed disk.  Another DBA dropped
the TEMP tablespace and recreated it on a different disk (apparently with a
larger extent size).   The current next_extent size is 4194304.   The
next_extent size on the pre-problem TEMP tablespace is  40960.

Is it possible that this difference in extent size in the TEMP tablespace
could cause a ten-fold degradation in performance?

Cherie


                                                                                       
                           
                    "Richard Ji"                                                       
                           
                    <[EMAIL PROTECTED]       To:     Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>      
                    m>                   cc:                                           
                           
                    Sent by:             Subject:     Re: Strange performance problem  
                           
                    [EMAIL PROTECTED]                                                     
                           
                    om                                                                 
                           
                                                                                       
                           
                                                                                       
                           
                    09/14/01 02:46                                                     
                           
                    PM                                                                 
                           
                    Please respond                                                     
                           
                    to ORACLE-L                                                        
                           
                                                                                       
                           
                                                                                       
                           




!! Please do not post Off Topic to this List !!

Did you check to see if there is anything else running on the server that
might take
resource away from Oracle?  It has happened to me once that the SA was
running something that he shouldn't and it's using a lot of system
resources.

HTH

>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 09/14/01 03:05PM >>>
!! Please do not post Off Topic to this List !!


I have a nightly load job that was being tracked by our developers.
According to their nightly logs (going back months), a query was running
as far back as they can record with a sub-second response time.

Then on a particular date (Aug. 23rd), the query started taking more
than 20 minutes to complete.   It has taken that long to complete ever
since.

I looked at the explain plan and it looks o.k.   Indexes are being used
and there are no suspicious full table scans.  The init.ora file has not
changed
since then.

We restored a full copy of the database to an alternate host using rman.
It should be an exact copy as of Aug. 16th.   I ran the query on the copy
and
on the current production database and the resulting explain plans were
identical except for the number of rows returned.   Total execution time
and cpu times were similar.

I looked through our change documentation and I do not see any record
of data structure changes or any data changes at all in the database
in question.

I am sort of at a loss for what to try next.   What sort of changes might
cause such an extreme degradation in performance as this?

This is an 8.1.7 database on Sun Solaris 2.8.  The optimization is
rule-based.
No partitioning.   Database is about 80 Gig in size.   Following is the
explain
plan, if anyone is interested:

SELECT ACTV_EAS_PERS_RPT_PROF_VIEW.LOGIN_ID,
ACTV_EAS_PERS_RPT_PROF_VIEW.ACCT_GRP_ID,
ACTV_EAS_PERS_RPT_PROF_VIEW.RPT_PROF_ID,
ACTV_EAS_PERS_RPT_PROF_VIEW.INS_DT_TM,
ACTV_EAS_PERS_RPT_PROF_VIEW.UPD_DT_TM
FROM GELCO.ACTV_EAS_PERS_RPT_PROF_VIEW

call     count       cpu    elapsed       disk      query    current
rows
------- ------  -------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
----------
Parse        1      0.26       0.27          0          0          0
0
Execute      2      0.01       0.01          0          0          1
0
Fetch      128    982.19    1026.27     145463    9732999      55484
1897
------- ------  -------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
----------
total      131    982.46    1026.55     145463    9732999      55485
1897

Rows     Row Source Operation
-------  ---------------------------------------------------
   1897  FILTER
   2041   NESTED LOOPS
   2422    HASH JOIN
   2341     NESTED LOOPS
   2342      NESTED LOOPS
   2338       NESTED LOOPS
   2338        NESTED LOOPS
   2346         NESTED LOOPS
   2510          NESTED LOOPS
   2510           NESTED LOOPS
   2510            INDEX FAST FULL SCAN (object id 17279)
   5018            INDEX UNIQUE SCAN (object id 17278)
   5018           TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID EAS_ACCT_GRP
   5018            INDEX UNIQUE SCAN (object id 17266)
   4854          INDEX RANGE SCAN (object id 17270)
   4682         TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID EAS_PERSON_RPT_PROF_ASSGN
   4682          INDEX RANGE SCAN (object id 17283)
   4674        VIEW ACTIVE_EAS_RPT_PROF_VIEW
 100491         SORT UNIQUE
43          UNION-ALL
     10           TABLE ACCESS FULL EAS_RPT_PROF
     33           FILTER
     34            NESTED LOOPS
    734             NESTED LOOPS
 207976              NESTED LOOPS
 207976               MERGE JOIN CARTESIAN
    706                INDEX FAST FULL SCAN (object id 17270)
 208680                SORT JOIN
    295                 TABLE ACCESS FULL EAS_CLNT_GRP_STS_LOG
 415950               TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID EAS_ACCT_GRP
 415950                INDEX UNIQUE SCAN (object id 17266)
 208708              INDEX UNIQUE SCAN (object id 17275)
    766             TABLE ACCESS FULL EAS_RPT_PROF
   4678       TABLE ACCESS FULL USER_SIGNON
   2341      INDEX UNIQUE SCAN (object id 17275)
    295     TABLE ACCESS FULL EAS_CLNT_GRP_STS_LOG
   4461    VIEW ACTIVE_EAS_PERSON_VIEW
2675205     SORT UNIQUE
   1105      UNION-ALL
    128       NESTED LOOPS
   1107        INDEX RANGE SCAN (object id 17284)
    128        TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID EAS_PERSON
   2212         INDEX UNIQUE SCAN (object id 17277)
    977       FILTER
   1008        NESTED LOOPS
 288511         NESTED LOOPS
 326271          MERGE JOIN CARTESIAN
   1107           INDEX RANGE SCAN (object id 17284)
 327376           SORT JOIN
    295            TABLE ACCESS FULL EAS_CLNT_GRP_STS_LOG
 614780          TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID EAS_PERSON
 652540           INDEX UNIQUE SCAN (object id 17277)
 289517         INDEX UNIQUE SCAN (object id 17275)
    540   SORT AGGREGATE
    287    TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID EAS_CLNT_GRP_STS_LOG
    557     INDEX RANGE SCAN (object id 17276)
1346           SORT AGGREGATE
    737            TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID EAS_ACCT_GRP_STS_LOG
   1412             INDEX RANGE SCAN (object id 17270)
   3938   SORT AGGREGATE
   2066    TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID EAS_PERSON_ASSGN_STS_LOG
   4035     INDEX RANGE SCAN (object id 17279)
    680        SORT AGGREGATE
    355         TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID EAS_CLNT_GRP_STS_LOG
    696          INDEX RANGE SCAN (object id 17276)
   2614            SORT AGGREGATE
   1578             TABLE ACCESS FULL EAS_PERSON_STS_LOG
   2614         SORT AGGREGATE
   1578          TABLE ACCESS FULL EAS_PERSON_STS_LOG
     14            SORT AGGREGATE
      7             TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID EAS_CLNT_GRP_STS_LOG
     14              INDEX RANGE SCAN (object id 17276)
     66            SORT AGGREGATE
     33             TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID EAS_ACCT_GRP_STS_LOG
     66              INDEX RANGE SCAN (object id 17270)


I thought for sure that when we restored this database, it would reveal
clues to what
happened but nothing that I see has changed.  I'd appreciate any clues
anyone
can give me about where to look and what to check.

Thanks,

Cherie




--
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
--
Author:
  INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Fat City Network Services    -- (858) 538-5051  FAX: (858) 538-5051
San Diego, California        -- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists
--------------------------------------------------------------------
To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
(or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from).  You may
also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).
--
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
--
Author: Richard Ji
  INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Fat City Network Services    -- (858) 538-5051  FAX: (858) 538-5051
San Diego, California        -- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists
--------------------------------------------------------------------
To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
(or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from).  You may
also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).




-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
-- 
Author: 
  INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Fat City Network Services    -- (858) 538-5051  FAX: (858) 538-5051
San Diego, California        -- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists
--------------------------------------------------------------------
To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
(or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from).  You may
also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).

Reply via email to