Re: waits on sequential scans - how did i solve it
Jack, I was going to suggest, what you did, but then I noticed the version Rahul was using. Igor Neyman, OCP DBA Perceptron, Inc. (734)414-4627 [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 5:58 PM Igor, How right you are! I answered without looking back at Rahul's original message. Jack Jack C. Applewhite Database Administrator/Developer OCP Oracle8 DBA iNetProfit, Inc. Austin, Texas www.iNetProfit.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] (512)327-9068 -Original Message- Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 10:26 AM To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L I don't think, 7.3.2 supports Index-Organized tables. Igor Neyman, OCP DBA Perceptron, Inc. (734)414-4627 [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 10:36 AM Rahul, If I'd known that there were only 8 columns in the table, I'd have included the recommendation to investigate an Index-Organized Table. That is where the table IS the index and the index IS the table. This saves disc space and cuts I/O in half for DML on the table, since a separate index is not maintained. Check out the docs on IOTs. Jack Jack C. Applewhite Database Administrator/Developer OCP Oracle8 DBA iNetProfit, Inc. Austin, Texas www.iNetProfit.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] (512)327-9068 -Original Message- Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 8:53 AM To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L list, based on the recommendation of posters (Jack) , i re-created the index with all the columns of a table ! (all 8 of them) analyzed the table/index and now all the queries are satisfied off an indexed range scan.. i also put the indexes on raw devices. regards -- From: Jack C. Applewhite[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Reply To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2001 8:25 PM To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L Subject: RE: how to improve sequential scans ? Rahul, Could this table be partitioned and the partitions spread across multiple disks? Could the index be partitioned as well? The concept here is, of course, divide and conquer. Could a column or two (or three) be added to the index to satisfy the query without having to hit the table? How frequently are these literal queries being issued? Are they shredding your shared pool and chewing up CPU by making Oracle do extra work in shared pool memory management? Are there aggregation (vs aggravation g) functions or order bys in the queries that might be causing sorts to disk? If aggregation, could you use materialized views to satisfy the queries? ...just a few ideas. Jack Jack C. Applewhite Database Administrator/Developer OCP Oracle8 DBA iNetProfit, Inc. Austin, Texas www.iNetProfit.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] (512)327-9068 -Original Message- Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2001 7:36 AM To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L list (AIX, 7.3.2) 5 clients are shooting the same sql to read data from an 18 million rows table. each time the sql uses a different literal value in the where clause... no bind variables. I CANNOT TOUCH THE APPLICATION, and have been given the task to re-configure the DB to increase performance. i have moved the table and it;s associated index to separate disks. and iostat show that only that only those two disks are being read. the session wait show that all the times the sessions are waiting on db file sequential read the db file being sequentially read in the above sessiion is the TABLE from which all the sid's are reading the table is analyzed and the sql's issued use the index. how can i further tune this config. ? TIA Rahul PS: my next step is to put the files on raw disks. -- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com -- Author: Jack C. Applewhite 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: Igor Neyman INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fat City Network Services-- (858) 538-5051
RE: waits on sequential scans - how did i solve it
Rahul, If I'd known that there were only 8 columns in the table, I'd have included the recommendation to investigate an Index-Organized Table. That is where the table IS the index and the index IS the table. This saves disc space and cuts I/O in half for DML on the table, since a separate index is not maintained. Check out the docs on IOTs. Jack Jack C. Applewhite Database Administrator/Developer OCP Oracle8 DBA iNetProfit, Inc. Austin, Texas www.iNetProfit.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] (512)327-9068 -Original Message- Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 8:53 AM To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L list, based on the recommendation of posters (Jack) , i re-created the index with all the columns of a table ! (all 8 of them) analyzed the table/index and now all the queries are satisfied off an indexed range scan.. i also put the indexes on raw devices. regards -- From: Jack C. Applewhite[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Reply To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2001 8:25 PM To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L Subject: RE: how to improve sequential scans ? Rahul, Could this table be partitioned and the partitions spread across multiple disks? Could the index be partitioned as well? The concept here is, of course, divide and conquer. Could a column or two (or three) be added to the index to satisfy the query without having to hit the table? How frequently are these literal queries being issued? Are they shredding your shared pool and chewing up CPU by making Oracle do extra work in shared pool memory management? Are there aggregation (vs aggravation g) functions or order bys in the queries that might be causing sorts to disk? If aggregation, could you use materialized views to satisfy the queries? ...just a few ideas. Jack Jack C. Applewhite Database Administrator/Developer OCP Oracle8 DBA iNetProfit, Inc. Austin, Texas www.iNetProfit.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] (512)327-9068 -Original Message- Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2001 7:36 AM To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L list (AIX, 7.3.2) 5 clients are shooting the same sql to read data from an 18 million rows table. each time the sql uses a different literal value in the where clause... no bind variables. I CANNOT TOUCH THE APPLICATION, and have been given the task to re-configure the DB to increase performance. i have moved the table and it;s associated index to separate disks. and iostat show that only that only those two disks are being read. the session wait show that all the times the sessions are waiting on db file sequential read the db file being sequentially read in the above sessiion is the TABLE from which all the sid's are reading the table is analyzed and the sql's issued use the index. how can i further tune this config. ? TIA Rahul PS: my next step is to put the files on raw disks. -- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com -- Author: Jack C. Applewhite 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).
RE: waits on sequential scans - how did i solve it
Title: RE: waits on sequential scans - how did i solve it Is this table/index now suitable to be a IOT, it will certainly save some space on an 18M row table John -Original Message- From: Rahul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 24 July 01 14:53 To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L Subject: waits on sequential scans - how did i solve it list, based on the recommendation of posters (Jack) , i re-created the index with all the columns of a table ! (all 8 of them) analyzed the table/index and now all the queries are satisfied off an indexed range scan.. i also put the indexes on raw devices. regards -- From: Jack C. Applewhite[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Reply To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2001 8:25 PM To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L Subject: RE: how to improve sequential scans ? Rahul, Could this table be partitioned and the partitions spread across multiple disks? Could the index be partitioned as well? The concept here is, of course, divide and conquer. Could a column or two (or three) be added to the index to satisfy the query without having to hit the table? How frequently are these literal queries being issued? Are they shredding your shared pool and chewing up CPU by making Oracle do extra work in shared pool memory management? Are there aggregation (vs aggravation g) functions or order bys in the queries that might be causing sorts to disk? If aggregation, could you use materialized views to satisfy the queries? ...just a few ideas. Jack Jack C. Applewhite Database Administrator/Developer OCP Oracle8 DBA iNetProfit, Inc. Austin, Texas www.iNetProfit.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] (512)327-9068 -Original Message- Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2001 7:36 AM To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L list (AIX, 7.3.2) 5 clients are shooting the same sql to read data from an 18 million rows table. each time the sql uses a different literal value in the where clause... no bind variables. I CANNOT TOUCH THE APPLICATION, and have been given the task to re-configure the DB to increase performance. i have moved the table and it;s associated index to separate disks. and iostat show that only that only those two disks are being read. the session wait show that all the times the sessions are waiting on db file sequential read the db file being sequentially read in the above sessiion is the TABLE from which all the sid's are reading the table is analyzed and the sql's issued use the index. how can i further tune this config. ? TIA Rahul PS: my next step is to put the files on raw disks. -- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com -- Author: Jack C. Applewhite 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: Rahul 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). ** This email and any attachments may be confidential and the subject of legal professional privilege. Any disclosure, use, storage or copying of this email without the consent of the sender is strictly prohibited. Please notify the sender immediately if you are not the intended recipient and then delete the email from your inbox and do not disclose the contents to another person, use, copy or store the information in any medium. **
Re: waits on sequential scans - how did i solve it
I don't think, 7.3.2 supports Index-Organized tables. Igor Neyman, OCP DBA Perceptron, Inc. (734)414-4627 [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 10:36 AM Rahul, If I'd known that there were only 8 columns in the table, I'd have included the recommendation to investigate an Index-Organized Table. That is where the table IS the index and the index IS the table. This saves disc space and cuts I/O in half for DML on the table, since a separate index is not maintained. Check out the docs on IOTs. Jack Jack C. Applewhite Database Administrator/Developer OCP Oracle8 DBA iNetProfit, Inc. Austin, Texas www.iNetProfit.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] (512)327-9068 -Original Message- Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 8:53 AM To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L list, based on the recommendation of posters (Jack) , i re-created the index with all the columns of a table ! (all 8 of them) analyzed the table/index and now all the queries are satisfied off an indexed range scan.. i also put the indexes on raw devices. regards -- From: Jack C. Applewhite[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Reply To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2001 8:25 PM To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L Subject: RE: how to improve sequential scans ? Rahul, Could this table be partitioned and the partitions spread across multiple disks? Could the index be partitioned as well? The concept here is, of course, divide and conquer. Could a column or two (or three) be added to the index to satisfy the query without having to hit the table? How frequently are these literal queries being issued? Are they shredding your shared pool and chewing up CPU by making Oracle do extra work in shared pool memory management? Are there aggregation (vs aggravation g) functions or order bys in the queries that might be causing sorts to disk? If aggregation, could you use materialized views to satisfy the queries? ...just a few ideas. Jack Jack C. Applewhite Database Administrator/Developer OCP Oracle8 DBA iNetProfit, Inc. Austin, Texas www.iNetProfit.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] (512)327-9068 -Original Message- Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2001 7:36 AM To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L list (AIX, 7.3.2) 5 clients are shooting the same sql to read data from an 18 million rows table. each time the sql uses a different literal value in the where clause... no bind variables. I CANNOT TOUCH THE APPLICATION, and have been given the task to re-configure the DB to increase performance. i have moved the table and it;s associated index to separate disks. and iostat show that only that only those two disks are being read. the session wait show that all the times the sessions are waiting on db file sequential read the db file being sequentially read in the above sessiion is the TABLE from which all the sid's are reading the table is analyzed and the sql's issued use the index. how can i further tune this config. ? TIA Rahul PS: my next step is to put the files on raw disks. -- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com -- Author: Jack C. Applewhite 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: Igor Neyman 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).
RE: waits on sequential scans - how did i solve it
I was going to say the same thing until I saw what version of Oracle he was running. Its a Oracle8 and up feature so Rahul is SOL. -Original Message- Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 7:36 AM To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L Rahul, If I'd known that there were only 8 columns in the table, I'd have included the recommendation to investigate an Index-Organized Table. That is where the table IS the index and the index IS the table. This saves disc space and cuts I/O in half for DML on the table, since a separate index is not maintained. Check out the docs on IOTs. Jack Jack C. Applewhite Database Administrator/Developer OCP Oracle8 DBA iNetProfit, Inc. Austin, Texas www.iNetProfit.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] (512)327-9068 -Original Message- Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 8:53 AM To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L list, based on the recommendation of posters (Jack) , i re-created the index with all the columns of a table ! (all 8 of them) analyzed the table/index and now all the queries are satisfied off an indexed range scan.. i also put the indexes on raw devices. regards -- From: Jack C. Applewhite[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Reply To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2001 8:25 PM To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L Subject: RE: how to improve sequential scans ? Rahul, Could this table be partitioned and the partitions spread across multiple disks? Could the index be partitioned as well? The concept here is, of course, divide and conquer. Could a column or two (or three) be added to the index to satisfy the query without having to hit the table? How frequently are these literal queries being issued? Are they shredding your shared pool and chewing up CPU by making Oracle do extra work in shared pool memory management? Are there aggregation (vs aggravation g) functions or order bys in the queries that might be causing sorts to disk? If aggregation, could you use materialized views to satisfy the queries? ...just a few ideas. Jack Jack C. Applewhite Database Administrator/Developer OCP Oracle8 DBA iNetProfit, Inc. Austin, Texas www.iNetProfit.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] (512)327-9068 -Original Message- Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2001 7:36 AM To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L list (AIX, 7.3.2) 5 clients are shooting the same sql to read data from an 18 million rows table. each time the sql uses a different literal value in the where clause... no bind variables. I CANNOT TOUCH THE APPLICATION, and have been given the task to re-configure the DB to increase performance. i have moved the table and it;s associated index to separate disks. and iostat show that only that only those two disks are being read. the session wait show that all the times the sessions are waiting on db file sequential read the db file being sequentially read in the above sessiion is the TABLE from which all the sid's are reading the table is analyzed and the sql's issued use the index. how can i further tune this config. ? TIA Rahul PS: my next step is to put the files on raw disks. -- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com -- Author: Jack C. Applewhite 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: Kimberly Smith 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).
