Srini,
If you have 400 concurrent users (2000 total users, with about 400
concurrent sessions typical for the busy time of the day), then you
should probably be using MTS instead of dedicated connections.
Using Microsoft pooling in COM may work out, but please check
with Oracle support on
You have done very nicely so far in tuning those joins... but...
More questions to you :
1. Why do you think this is still a database problem?
2. Will partitioning those larger tables help the queries?
3. What have you checked to make sure that the bottleneck is not the
web-server?
4. Are
Title: RE: Database Performance Question
Partitions, Materialized views, bit map indexes.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2002 10:25 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Subject: Database Performance Question
Title: RE: Database Performance Question
Parentitions and
Maternalized Views are supposed to come out in 10i.
(Paternalized
views take longer, they required retrofitting onto the
kernel
command tree.
)
-Original Message-From:
Godlewski, Melissa [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent
make sure you are not using any function like upper lower ... as part of the select
statement. If yes then by creating function based index will improve the performance
dramatically.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 01/29/02 10:35AM
Partitions, Materialized views, bit map indexes.
-Original
Kirti:
Thanks for the insight.
Here are my Answers:
1. I feel database is the problem because when only a subset of the total
data is used the performance is excellent (with one tenth of the total
data). The no. of users are the same. Only amount data that is retrieved
is enormous (almost 10
You may want to look at using materialized views. They are easy to setup
and can be refreshed manualy or automaticaly.
Thanks,
cj
SRAJENDRAN@nlf
How many rows are you bringing back from a typical query, how good is the
best filter condition and are you filtering that first before joining to the
other tables in the explain plan?
What is the query and explain plan?
Iain Nicoll
-Original Message-
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2002
Typically i bringing back about 20,000 rows and that too after filtering
first and joining with bigger tables.
Srini
-Original Message-
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2002 12:41 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
How many rows are you bringing back from a typical query, how good
Hi Srini,
2000 dedicated connections? How much memory does the machine have? Is it
swapping at all? What is your sort_area_size, etc? How about the SGA?
Just some thoughts...
- Jerry
-Original Message-
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2002 1:36 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Bringing back 20,000 rows is not good in my shop. I recently tuned a SQL
(returned 14000 rows, and it is web-based appl) from running 15 minutes to
less than 15 seconds. The SQL joining only two indexes. The only changed I
make was the index. The index had 2 keys before and I added the third
Srini,
1. You don't have to feel... go after v$system_event, v$session_event and
v$session_wait to find out what events and SQLs are contributing to
unnecessary waits and try to find out what can be done to resolve it. If you
think data retrieval is the problem, then info from these views will
Thanks
-Original Message-
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2002 3:05 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Bringing back 20,000 rows is not good in my shop. I recently tuned a SQL
(returned 14000 rows, and it is web-based appl) from running 15 minutes to
less than 15 seconds. The SQL
Thank you , I will look into the suggestions.
Srini
-Original Message-
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2002 3:45 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Srini,
1. You don't have to feel... go after v$system_event, v$session_event and
v$session_wait to find out what events and SQLs are
14 matches
Mail list logo
