A block of code takes more time in JRE 6_20 but less in the previous versio

while (entries.hasMoreElements()) {
ZipEntry zipEntry = (ZipEntry) entries.nextElement();
is = zipFile.getInputStream(zipEntry);
File file = new File(unzipDir, zipEntry.getName());
if (is.available() == 0) {
file.mkdir();
is.close();
} else {
file.createNewFile();
fos = new FileOutputStream(file);
CommonUtils.connectIO(is, fos, -1, true);
}

Sorry a type,. The above code takes more time when I run withJDK 6_20. But its less time if the previous version is used. Cannot figure whats wrong. Here is the full method.
* Unzips the specified file into the specified directory. The optional file names list allows the caller
* to specify the actual files that get unzipped.
* @param srcFile the file to unzip
* @param unzipDir the directory where the unzipped files will be put
* @param fileNames the optional list of name strings for the zip entries to unzip or <code>null</code> to unzip
* all entries
* @throws NullPointerException if either the source file or the unzip directory is <code>null</code>
* @throws javax.faces.FacesException if the
public static void unzipFile(File srcFile, File unzipDir, List fileNames) {
if (srcFile == null) {
throw new NullPointerException("The zip file argument is null");
if (unzipDir == null) {
throw new NullPointerException("The unzip directory argument is null");
ZipFile zipFile = null;
InputStream is = null;
FileOutputStream fos = null;
try {
zipFile = new ZipFile(srcFile);
Enumeration entries = null;
if (fileNames != null) {
// Use a vector only so we can abstract away the zip entries enumeration...
Vector v = new Vector();
Iterator it = fileNames.iterator();
while (it.hasNext()) {
String name = (String) it.next();
v.add(new ZipEntry(name));
entries = v.elements();
} else {
entries = zipFile.entries();
while (entries.hasMoreElements()) {
ZipEntry zipEntry = (ZipEntry) entries.nextElement();
is = zipFile.getInputStream(zipEntry);
File file = new File(unzipDir, zipEntry.getName());
if (is.available() == 0) {
file.mkdir();
is.close();
} else {
file.createNewFile();
fos = new FileOutputStream(file);
CommonUtils.connectIO(is, fos, -1, true);
catch (IOException e) {
throw new FacesException("Problem unzipping file " + srcFile.getAbsolutePath(), e);
finally {
try {
if (is != null) {
is.close();
if (fos != null) {
fos.close();
if (zipFile != null) {
zipFile.close();
catch (IOException e) {
throw new FacesException("Problem closing resources when unzipping file " + srcFile.getAbsolutePath(), e);
}

Similar Messages

  • Bind variable code takes more time to complete?

    Hello, My database is oracle11g.
    I have same plsql code and first one is without bind variable and second one is with bind variable. Usually, bind variable should take less time. But here
    the bind variable takes more time than the regular code... Can any one please explain why?
    SQL> alter system flush shared_pool;
    System altered.
    SQL> declare
    2 cursor c1 is select * from emp where rownum < 50;
    3 l_start NUMBER DEFAULT DBMS_UTILITY.GET_TIME;
    4 v_cnt number;
    5 begin
    6 for i in c1 loop
    7 SELECT count(*) into v_cnt
    8 FROM rate
    9 WHERE rate_id IN (SELECT rate_id
    10 FROM ratedetail
    11 WHERE benefit_id = i.benefit_id)
    12 AND effective_date =
    13 TO_DATE ('2011-01-23 00:00:00', 'yyyy-MM-dd HH24:MI:SS')
    14 AND rate_type_id = 1;
    15 end loop;
    16 DBMS_OUTPUT.PUT_LINE('total minutes....'||ROUND(ROUND((DBMS_UTILITY.GET_TIME - l_start)/100, 2)
    /60,3));
    17 end;
    18 /
    total minutes.....06
    PL/SQL procedure successfully completed.
    SQL> alter system flush shared_pool;
    System altered.
    SQL>
    SQL> declare
    2 cursor c1 is select benefit_id from emp where rownum < 50;
    3 l_start NUMBER DEFAULT DBMS_UTILITY.GET_TIME;
    4 v_cnt number;
    5 begin
    6 for i in c1 loop
    7 execute immediate 'SELECT count(*)
    8 FROM rate
    9 WHERE rate_id IN (SELECT rate_id
    10 FROM ratedetail
    11 WHERE benefit_id = :x)
    12 AND effective_date = trunc(sysdate)-202
    13 AND rate_type_id = 1'
    14 into v_cnt using i.benefit_id;
    15 end loop;
    16 DBMS_OUTPUT.PUT_LINE('total minutes....'||ROUND(ROUND((DBMS_UTILITY.GET_TIME - l_start)/100, 2)
    /60,3));
    17 end;
    18 /
    total minutes.....061
    PL/SQL procedure successfully completed.
    SQL>

    Shrinika wrote:
    Thanks for the clarification.. Now i understand...
    One final question on this thread before i close this thread....
    My database is set to CURSOR_SHARING=FORCE for some reason. It seems somebody applied a "quick and dirty fix" to "database is slow" problem. BAD PRACTICE
    My question is, when we use bind variable, does it parse the sql code every time? or does it reuse the execution plan?
    In my database, it reuse the execution plan... Just checking... When we set CURSOR_SHARING=FORCE, it should generate the execution plan
    for every unqiue sql code... Is that correct? Am i confusing?If by "parse" you mean a "hard parse" (which generates execution plan), then the answer is NO. As you observed, it reuses execution plan.
    For e.g. with CURSOR_SHARING=FORCE setting, following SQLs
    select employee_no, first_name, last_name from employees where dept_no = 10 ;and
    select employee_no, first_name, last_name from employees where dept_no = 20 ;would tend to reuse the same execution plan since both of these will be rewritten by oracle (before execution) as
    select employee_no, first_name, last_name from employees where dept_no = :SYS01 ;Hope this helps.
    Edited by: user503699 on Aug 14, 2010 3:55 AM

  • Why import of change request in production takes more time than quality?

    Hello All,
                 why import of change request in production takes more time than import into quality?

    Hi jahangeer,
    I believe it takes same time to import a request in both quality and production as they will be in sync.
    Even then if it takes more time in production that may depend on the change request.
    Thanks
    Pavan

  • Optimizing the query - which takes more time

    Hi,
    Am having a query which was returning the results pretty fast one week back but now the same query takes more time to respond, nothing much changed in the table data, what could be the problem. Am using IN in the where clause, whether that could be an issue? if so what is the best method of rewriting the query.
    SELECT  RI.RESOURCE_NAME,TR.MSISDN,MAX(TR.ADDRESS1_GOOGLE) KEEP(DENSE_RANK LAST ORDER BY TR.MSG_DATE_INFO) ADDRESS1_GOOGLE,
                    MAX(TR.TIME_STAMP) MSG_DATE_INFO FROM  TRACKING_REPORT TR, RESOURCE_INFO RI
                    WHERE TR.MSISDN IN ( SELECT  MSISDN FROM  RESOURCE_INFO WHERE GROUP_ID ='4'
                   AND COM_ID='12') AND RI.MSISDN = TR.MSISDN
                   GROUP BY  RI.RESOURCE_NAME,TR.MSISDN ORDER BY MSG_DATE_INFO DESC

    Hi
    i have followed this link http://www.lorentzcenter.nl/awcourse/oracle/server.920/a96533/sqltrace.htm in enabling the trace and found out the following trace output, can you explain the problem here and its remedial action pls.
    SELECT  RI.RESOURCE_NAME,TR.MSISDN,MAX(TR.ADDRESS1_GOOGLE) KEEP(DENSE_RANK
      LAST ORDER BY TR.MSG_DATE_INFO) ADDRESS1_GOOGLE,                      MAX(TR.TIME_STAMP)
      MSG_DATE_INFO
    FROM
      TRACKING_REPORT TR, RESOURCE_INFO RI                          WHERE RI.GROUP_ID ='426'                         AND
      RI.COM_ID='122' AND RI.MSISDN = TR.MSISDN                      GROUP BY  RI.RESOURCE_NAME,
      TR.MSISDN
    call     count       cpu    elapsed       disk      query    current        rows
    Parse        1      0.01       0.02          0          0          0           0
    Execute      1      0.00       0.00          0          0          0           0
    Fetch        6     13.69     389.03      81747     280722          0          72
    total        8     13.70     389.05      81747     280722          0          72
    Misses in library cache during parse: 1
    Optimizer goal: CHOOSE
    Parsing user id: 281 
    Rows     Row Source Operation
         72  SORT GROUP BY
    276558   NESTED LOOPS 
         79    TABLE ACCESS FULL RESOURCE_INFO
    276558    TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID TRACKING_REPORT
    276558     INDEX RANGE SCAN TR_INDX_ON_MSISDN_TIME (object id 60507)
    ********************************************************************************and the plan_table output is
    STATEMENT_ID     TIMESTAMP     REMARKS     OPERATION     OPTIONS     OBJECT_NODE     OBJECT_OWNER     OBJECT_NAME     OBJECT_INSTANCE     OBJECT_TYPE     OPTIMIZER     SEARCH_COLUMNS     ID     PARENT_ID     POSITION     COST     CARDINALITY     BYTES     OTHER_TAG     PARTITION_START     PARTITION_STOP     PARTITION_ID     OTHER     DISTRIBUTION     CPU_COST     IO_COST     TEMP_SPACE     ACCESS_PREDICATES     FILTER_PREDICATES
         23-Mar-11 23:36:45          SELECT STATEMENT                                   CHOOSE          0          115     115     1058     111090                                        115               
         23-Mar-11 23:36:45          SORT     GROUP BY                                        1     0     1     115     1058     111090                                        115               
         23-Mar-11 23:36:45          NESTED LOOPS                                             2     1     1     9     4603     483315                                        9               
         23-Mar-11 23:36:45          TABLE ACCESS     FULL          BSNL_RTMS     RESOURCE_INFO     2          ANALYZED          3     2     1     8     1     30                                        8               "RI"."GROUP_ID"=426 AND "RI"."COM_ID"='122'
         23-Mar-11 23:36:45          TABLE ACCESS     BY INDEX ROWID          BSNL_RTMS     TRACKING_REPORT     1          ANALYZED          4     2     2     1     3293     246975                                        1               
         23-Mar-11 23:36:45          INDEX     RANGE SCAN          BSNL_RTMS     TR_INDX_ON_MSISDN_TIME          NON-UNIQUE          1     5     4     1     1     3293                                             1          "RI"."MSISDN"="TR"."MSISDN"     

  • 'BAPI_GOODSMVT_CREATE' takes more time for creating material document for the 1st time

    Hi Experts,
    I am doing goods movement using BAPI_GOODSMVT_CREATE in my custom code.
    Then there is some functional configuration such that, material documents and TR and TO are getting created.
    Now I need to get TO and TR numbers from LTAK table passing material documnt number and year, which I got from above used BAPI.
    The problem I am facing is very strange.
    Only for the 1st time, I am not finding TR and TO values in LTAK table. And subsequent runs I get entries in LTAK in there is a wait time of 5 seconds after bapi call.
    I have found 'BAPI_GOODSMVT_CREATE' takes more time for creating material document with similar issue, but no solution or explanation.
    Note 838036 says something similar, but it seems obsolete.
    Kindly share your expertise and opinions.
    Thanks,
    Anil

    Hi,
    please check if some of following OSS notes are not valid for your problem:
    [Note 838036 - AFS: Performance issues during GR with ref. to PO|https://service.sap.com/sap/support/notes/838036]
    [Note 391142 - Performance: Goods receipt for inbound delivery|https://service.sap.com/sap/support/notes/391142]
    [Note 1414418 - Goods receipt for customer returns: Various corrections|https://service.sap.com/sap/support/notes/1414418]
    The other idea is not to commit each call, but executing commit of packages e.g. after 1000 BAPI calls.
    But otherwise, I am afraid you can not do a lot about performance of standard BAPI. Maybe there is some customer enhancement which is taking too long inside the BAPI, but this has to be analysed by you. To analyse performance, just execute your program via tr. SE30.
    Regards
    Adrian

  • DELETE FROM database table takes more time...

    Hi Friends,
    The below statement takes more time.
    LOOP AT i_final.
      DELETE FROM zcisconec WHERE werks = i_final-werks
                              AND aufnr = i_final-aufnr
                              AND vornr = i_final-vornr.
    ENDLOOP.
    Internal table I_FINAL will have more than 80,000 records.
    DB Table zcisconec have 4 primary key fields out of 10 fields.
    Below 4 fields are primary key fields
    WERKS
    AUFNR
    VORNR
    MATNR
    Please guide me..How to optimize it?
    Regards,
    Viji

    HI,
    Check this one ,
    put a break point on that delete statement and add another line of code after, like .... CHECK SY-SUBRC = 0. Now got to debug and stop at the DELETE statement, check the number of records in your DB table, now hit F5 to step to the next statement, now go back to SE16 and refresh, do you see the number change? It should.........if you are selecting the data correctly, make sure that you are getting data into the IT_  table.
    DELETE zcisconec from i_final.
    CALL FUNCTION 'DB_COMMIT'.
    Regards,
    Ansari.
    Edited by: Ansari Samsudeen on Sep 15, 2009 8:14 AM

  • Publishing EJBs takes more time in Oracle Weblogic 10.3 workshop

    Hi,
    We recently migrated from Weblogic 9.2 to Oracle Weblogic 10.3 workshop.
    I have a ejb project which has more than 30 ejb's(both entity and session ejbs).
    The problem is: whenever I modify the code inside a method and save, it builds the project automatically. After that when I try to publish the module, it takes around 5 - 10 minutes for publishing.
    Points to note are : The ejb I am modifying has reference to other (10 - 20) ejbs. Hence it takes more time for even for single ejb change.
    however, when i modify an ejb which has no reference to ejb, takes less time to publish.
    My question is : is there a way to reduce the publishing time in this scenario.
    Thanks in advance!

    There is a special forum for Workshop issues:
    Workshop
    Try there.

  • Automatic DOP take more time to execute query

    We upgraded database to oracle 11gR2. While testing Automatic DOP feature with our existing query it takes more time than with parallel.
    Note: No constrains or Index created on table to gain performance while loading data (5000records / sec)
    Os : Sun Solaris 64bit
    CPU = 8
    RAM = 7456M
    Default parameter settings:
    parallel_degree_policy               string      MANUAL
    parallel_degree_limit                string      CPU
    parallel_threads_per_cpu             integer     2
    arallel_degree_limit                 string      CPU
    cpu_count                            integer     8
    parallel_threads_per_cpu             integer     2
    resource_manager_cpu_allocation      integer     8
    Query:
    SELECT COUNT(*)
    from (
    SELECT
    /*+ FIRST_ROWS(50), PARALLEL */
    Query gets executed in 22minutes : execution plan
      COUNT(*)
          9600
    Elapsed: 00:22:10.71
    Execution Plan
    Plan hash value: 3765539975
    | Id  | Operation           | Name             | Rows  | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     | Pstart| Pstop |
    |   0 | SELECT STATEMENT    |                  |     1 |    21 |  2164K  (1)| 07:12:52 |       |   |
    |   1 |  SORT AGGREGATE     |                  |     1 |    21 |            |          |       |   |
    |   2 |   PARTITION RANGE OR|                  | 89030 |  1825K|  2164K  (1)| 07:12:52 |KEY(OR)|KEY(OR)|
    |*  3 |    TABLE ACCESS FULL| SUBSCRIBER_EVENT | 89030 |  1825K|  2164K  (1)| 07:12:52 |KEY(OR)|KEY(OR)|Automatic DOP Query: parameters set
    alter session set PARALLEL_DEGREE_POLICY = limited;
    alter session force parallel query ;Query:
    SELECT COUNT(*)
    from (
    SELECT /*+ FIRST_ROWS(50), PARALLEL*/
    This query takes more than 2hrs to execute
    COUNT(*)
          9600
    Elapsed: 02:07:48.81
    Execution Plan
    Plan hash value: 127536830
    | Id  | Operation              | Name             | Rows  | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     | Pstart|Pstop |    TQ   |IN-OUT| PQ Distrib |
    |   0 | SELECT STATEMENT       |                  |     1 |    21 |   150K  (1)| 00:30:01 |       |      |         |      |            |
    |   1 |  SORT AGGREGATE        |                  |     1 |    21 |            |          |       |      |         |      |            |
    |   2 |   PX COORDINATOR       |                  |       |       |            |          |       |      |         |      |            |
    |   3 |    PX SEND QC (RANDOM) | :TQ10000         |     1 |    21 |            |          |       |      |  Q1,00  | P->S | QC (RAND)  |
    |   4 |     SORT AGGREGATE     |                  |     1 |    21 |            |          |       |      |  Q1,00  | PCWP |            |
    |   5 |      PX BLOCK ITERATOR |                  | 89030 |  1825K|   150K  (1)| 00:30:01 |KEY(OR)|KEY(OR)|  Q1,00 | PCWC |            |
    |*  6 |       TABLE ACCESS FULL| SUBSCRIBER_EVENT | 89030 |  1825K|   150K  (1)| 00:30:01 |KEY(OR)|KEY(OR)|  Q1,00 | PCWP |            |
    Note
    - automatic DOP: Computed Degree of Parallelism is 16 because of degree limitcan some one help us to find out where we did wrong or any pointer will really helpful to resolve an issue.
    Edited by: Sachin B on May 11, 2010 4:05 AM

    Generated AWR report for ADOP
    Foreground Wait Events                       DB/Inst: HDB/hdb  Snaps: 158-161
    -> s  - second, ms - millisecond -    1000th of a second
    -> Only events with Total Wait Time (s) >= .001 are shown
    -> ordered by wait time desc, waits desc (idle events last)
    -> %Timeouts: value of 0 indicates value was < .5%.  Value of null is truly 0
                                                                 Avg
                                            %Time Total Wait    wait    Waits   % DB
    Event                             Waits -outs   Time (s)    (ms)     /txn   time
    direct path read                522,173     0    125,051     239    628.4   99.3
    db file sequential read             663     0        156     235      0.8     .1
    log file sync                       165     0        117     712      0.2     .1
    Disk file operations I/O            267     0         63     236      0.3     .1
    db file scattered read              251     0         36     145      0.3     .0
    control file sequential re          217     0         32     149      0.3     .0
    library cache load lock               2     0         10    4797      0.0     .0
    cursor: pin S wait on X               3     0          9    3149      0.0     .0
    read by other session                 5     0          2     429      0.0     .0
    kfk: async disk IO              613,170     0          2       0    737.9     .0
    sort segment request                  1   100          1    1007      0.0     .0
    os thread startup                    16     0          1      43      0.0     .0
    direct path write temp                1     0          1     527      0.0     .0
    latch free                           51     0          0       2      0.1     .0
    kksfbc child completion               1   100          0      59      0.0     .0
    latch: cache buffers chain           19     0          0       2      0.0     .0
    latch: shared pool                   36     0          0       1      0.0     .0
    PX Deq: Slave Session Stat           21     0          0       1      0.0     .0
    library cache: mutex X               45     0          0       1      0.1     .0
    CSS initialization                    2     0          0       6      0.0     .0
    enq: KO - fast object chec            1     0          0      11      0.0     .0
    buffer busy waits                     3     0          0       1      0.0     .0
    cursor: pin S                         9     0          0       0      0.0     .0
    CSS operation: action                 2     0          0       1      0.0     .0
    direct path write                     1     0          0       2      0.0     .0
    jobq slave wait                  17,554   100      8,942     509     21.1
    PX Deq: Execute Reply             4,060    95      7,870    1938      4.9
    SQL*Net message from clien           96     0      5,756   59962      0.1
    PX Deq: Execution Msg               618    56        712    1152      0.7
    KSV master wait                      11     0          0       2      0.0
    PX Deq: Join ACK                     16     0          0       1      0.0
    PX Deq: Parse Reply                  14     0          0       1      0.0
    Background Wait Events                       DB/Inst: HDB/hdb  Snaps: 158-161
    -> ordered by wait time desc, waits desc (idle events last)
    -> Only events with Total Wait Time (s) >= .001 are shown
    -> %Timeouts: value of 0 indicates value was < .5%.  Value of null is truly 0
                                                                 Avg
                                            %Time Total Wait    wait    Waits   % bg
    Event                             Waits -outs   Time (s)    (ms)     /txn   time
    control file sequential re        6,249     0      2,375     380      7.5   55.6
    control file parallel writ        2,003     0        744     371      2.4   17.4
    db file parallel write            1,604     0        503     313      1.9   11.8
    log file parallel write             861     0        320     371      1.0    7.5
    db file sequential read             363     0        151     415      0.4    3.5
    db file scattered read              152     0         64     421      0.2    1.5
    Disk file operations I/O            276     0         21      77      0.3     .5
    os thread startup                   316     0         15      48      0.4     .4
    ADR block file read                  24     0         11     450      0.0     .3
    rdbms ipc reply                      17    12          7     403      0.0     .2
    Data file init write                  6     0          6    1016      0.0     .1
    direct path write                    21     0          6     287      0.0     .1
    log file sync                         7     0          6     796      0.0     .1
    ADR block file write                 10     0          4     414      0.0     .1
    enq: JS - queue lock                  1     0          3    2535      0.0     .1
    ASM file metadata operatio        1,801     0          2       1      2.2     .0
    db file parallel read                30     0          1      40      0.0     .0
    kfk: async disk IO                  955     0          1       1      1.1     .0
    db file single write                  1     0          0     415      0.0     .0
    reliable message                     10     0          0      23      0.0     .0
    latch: shared pool                   75     0          0       2      0.1     .0
    latch: call allocation               26     0          0       2      0.0     .0
    CSS initialization                    7     0          0       6      0.0     .0
    asynch descriptor resize            352   100          0       0      0.4     .0
    undo segment extension                2   100          0       5      0.0     .0
    CSS operation: action                 9     0          0       1      0.0     .0
    CSS operation: query                 42     0          0       0      0.1     .0
    latch: parallel query allo            4     0          0       0      0.0     .0
    rdbms ipc message                37,948    97    104,599    2756     45.7
    DIAG idle wait                   16,762   100     16,927    1010     20.2
    ASM background timer              1,724     0      8,467    4912      2.1
    shared server idle wait             282   100      8,465   30019      0.3
    pmon timer                        3,123    90      8,465    2711      3.8
    wait for unread message on        8,381   100      8,465    1010     10.1
    dispatcher timer                    141   100      8,463   60019      0.2
    Streams AQ: qmn coordinato          604    50      8,462   14010      0.7
    Streams AQ: qmn slave idle          304     0      8,462   27836      0.4
    smon timer                           35    71      8,382  239496      0.0
    Space Manager: slave idle         1,621    99      8,083    4986      2.0
    PX Idle Wait                      2,392    99      4,739    1981      2.9
    class slave wait                     46     0        623   13546      0.1
    KSV master wait                       2     0          0      27      0.0
    SQL*Net message from clien            7     0          0       1      0.0
    Wait Event Histogram                         DB/Inst: HDB/hdb  Snaps: 158-161
    -> Units for Total Waits column: K is 1000, M is 1000000, G is 1000000000
    -> % of Waits: value of .0 indicates value was <.05%; value of null is truly 0
    -> % of Waits: column heading of <=1s is truly <1024ms, >1s is truly >=1024ms
    -> Ordered by Event (idle events last)
                                                        % of Waits
                               Total
    Event                      Waits  <1ms  <2ms  <4ms  <8ms <16ms <32ms  <=1s   >1s
    ADR block file read           24                                     100.0
    ADR block file write          10                                     100.0
    ADR file lock                 12 100.0
    ASM file metadata operatio  1812  99.0    .3    .4                      .2    .1
    CSS initialization             9                   100.0
    CSS operation: action         11  90.9   9.1
    CSS operation: query          54 100.0
    Data file init write           6        16.7  16.7                    16.7  50.0
    Disk file operations I/O     533  88.7   2.6    .6               1.5    .2   6.4
    PX Deq: Signal ACK EXT         4 100.0
    PX Deq: Signal ACK RSG         2 100.0
    PX Deq: Slave Session Stat    21  42.9  28.6  28.6
    SQL*Net break/reset to cli     6 100.0
    SQL*Net message to client    102 100.0
    SQL*Net more data to clien     4 100.0
    asynch descriptor resize     527 100.0
    buffer busy waits              4  75.0        25.0
    control file parallel writ  2003   9.3    .5          .0    .1        90.0
    control file sequential re  6466  10.6    .0    .0    .0    .1    .2  89.0
    cursor: pin S                  9 100.0
    cursor: pin S wait on X        3                          33.3  33.3        33.3
    db file parallel read         30                           6.7  30.0  63.3
    db file parallel write      1604   7.4    .1                .6  16.5  75.5
    db file scattered read       403   3.7    .2   2.5  13.6  14.9   3.5  61.5
    db file sequential read     1017  12.3    .8   2.3   7.3   6.6   2.0  68.8
    db file single write           1                                     100.0
    direct path read           522.2   2.2   2.1    .1    .0   1.8  17.9  75.9
    direct path write             22         4.5                     4.5  90.9
    direct path write temp         1                                     100.0
    enq: JS - queue lock           1                                           100.0
    enq: KO - fast object chec     1                         100.0
    enq: PS - contention           1 100.0
    kfk: async disk IO         614.1 100.0                                  .0
    kksfbc child completion        1                                     100.0
    latch free                    58  46.6  27.6  15.5  10.3
    latch: cache buffers chain    19  36.8  10.5  52.6
    latch: call allocation        26  76.9  11.5         7.7         3.8
    latch: parallel query allo     4 100.0
    latch: shared pool           111  44.1  28.8  27.0
    library cache load lock        2                                           100.0
    library cache: mutex X        45  84.4   8.9   4.4   2.2
    log file parallel write      861  10.0          .1    .1              89.5    .2
    log file sync                172   6.4                                90.1   3.5
    os thread startup            332                                     100.0
    rdbms ipc reply               18  72.2                                11.1  16.7
    read by other session          5                                     100.0
    reliable message              11  81.8   9.1                           9.1
    sort segment request           1                                     100.0
    undo segment extension         2  50.0                    50.0
    ASM background timer        1724    .8    .6    .1                      .6  97.9
    DIAG idle wait             16.8K                                     100.0
    KSV master wait               13   7.7  23.1  61.5                     7.7
    PX Deq: Execute Reply       4060    .4          .0    .0          .1   3.4  96.0
    PX Deq: Execution Msg        617  34.7   1.5   2.4   1.5   1.5    .2    .8  57.5
    PX Deq: Join ACK              16  93.8                     6.3
    PX Deq: Parse Reply           14  71.4   7.1  14.3   7.1
    PX Idle Wait                2384    .0                                  .6  99.3
    SQL*Net message from clien   103  82.5         1.0   1.9               1.0  13.6
    Space Manager: slave idle   1621                                        .2  99.8
    Streams AQ: qmn coordinato   604  50.0                                      50.0
    Wait Event Histogram                         DB/Inst: HDB/hdb  Snaps: 158-161
    -> Units for Total Waits column: K is 1000, M is 1000000, G is 1000000000
    -> % of Waits: value of .0 indicates value was <.05%; value of null is truly 0
    -> % of Waits: column heading of <=1s is truly <1024ms, >1s is truly >=1024ms
    -> Ordered by Event (idle events last)Edited by: Sachin B on May 11, 2010 4:52 AM

  • Af:commandNavigationItem takes more time to perform action on screen

    For my project there is a dynamic implementation of af:commandNavigationItem and the actions also will be binded during runtime.
    This code was working fine with the JDeveloper 11.1.1.0.2 (OWS 10.3.0) Version, but after migrating the code to JDeveloper 11.1.1.2.0 (OWS 10.3.2), it shows hourglass for a longer time (which was unusual) and then it perform the operation.
    I ran the project in Debug mode and I found it takes more time to come to the breakpoint.
    It writes the below information in console
    <UnifiedDialogTag><setVisible> property "visible" setter is using a no-op implementation. Used in extreme cases when the property value, beyond the default value, results in unwanted behavior.
    Experts: Please through some light to proceed with this issue as I am looking some lead information from where I have to look into the issue.

    Hi,
    can you file a bug or provide a testcase ?
    Frank

  • Multithreaded File Copy takes more time 1.5 times than single thread.

    import java.io.File;
    import java.io.FileInputStream;
    import java.io.FileOutputStream;
    import java.nio.channels.FileChannel;
    public class TestMulti implements Runnable {
         public static Thread Th1;
         public static Thread Th2;
         String str = null;
         static int seqNumber = 1000000000;
         public static void main(String args[]) {
              Th1 = new Thread(new TestMulti("1_1"));
              Th2 = new Thread(new TestMulti("1_2"));
              Th1.start();
              Th2.start();
              try {
                   Th1.join();
                   Th2.join();
              } catch (Exception e) {
                   e.printStackTrace();
         public TestMulti(String str) {
              this.str = str;
         public void run() {
              File f = new File("C:/Songs2/" + str);
              File files[] = f.listFiles();
              String fileName = "";
              String seqName = "";
              String seq = "";
              int sequenceNo = 0;
              try {
                   for (int j = 0; j < files.length; j++) {
                        File musicFiles[] = files[j].listFiles();
                        for (int k = 0; k < musicFiles.length; k++) {
                             seq = "18072006";
                             seqName = seq + seqNumber;
                             sequenceNo = 10000 + seqNumber % 100;
                             seqNumber = seqNumber + 1;
                             fileName = musicFiles[k].getName();
                             String fileExt = fileName.substring(fileName.length() - 3,fileName.length());
                             String targetFile = "C:/Songs1/" + sequenceNo;
                             File fi = new File(targetFile);
                             if (!fi.exists()) { fi.mkdir(); }
                             targetFile = "C:/Songs1/" + sequenceNo + "/" + seqName+ "." + fileExt;
                             FileInputStream fin = new FileInputStream(musicFiles[k]);
                             FileChannel fcin = fin.getChannel();
                             FileOutputStream fout = new FileOutputStream(targetFile);
                             FileChannel fcout = fout.getChannel();
                             fcin.transferTo(0, fcin.size(), fcout);
                             fout.flush();
                             fcout.close();
                             fcin.close();
                             fout.close();
                             fin.close();
              } catch (Exception e) {
                   e.printStackTrace();
    Multithreaded File Copy takes more time 1.5 times than single thread.
    Is there any issue with this code. Please help me.

    If all of your threads are doing CPU-intensive work, or all are doing I/O to the same interface (for example, writing to the same physical disk), then multithreading would not be expected to help you.
    Multithreading does not magically make your CPU able to do more work per unit time than it could otherwise.
    Multithreading does not magically make your network interface or disk controller able to pump more bytes through than it could otherwise.
    Where multithreading helps (some or all of this has already been mentioned):
    * When you have multiple, independent CPU-bound tasks AND multiple CPUs available on which to execute them.
    * When you have tasks that involve a mix of CPU-bound and I/O-bound work. The CPU-bound stuff can crank while the I/O-bound stuff waits for bytes to be written or read, thus making use of what would otherwise be CPU "dead time."
    What you're doing does not fit either of those scenarios. Copying a file is pure I/O. If the source and destination file are on the same phsyical disk or controller, adding threads only adds overhead with no real possibility to do more work per unit time.
    If your source and destination are on different disks or controllers, then it's possible that you could get some benefit from multithreading. While one thread is waiting for bytes to be written to the target disk, the other thread can be reading from the source disk.

  • How to do Query optimization?It takes more time to fetch the record from db. Very urgent, I need your assistance

    Hi all
                                     I want to fetch just twenty thousands records from table. My query take more time to fetch  twenty thousands records.  I post my working query, Could you correct the query for me. thanks in advance.
    Query                    
    select
    b.Concatenated_account Account,
    b.Account_description description,
    SUM(case when(Bl.ACTUAL_FLAG='B') then
    ((NVL(Bl.PERIOD_NET_DR, 0)- NVL(Bl.PERIOD_NET_CR, 0)) + (NVL(Bl.PROJECT_TO_DATE_DR, 0)- NVL(Bl.PROJECT_TO_DATE_CR, 0)))end) "Budget_2011"
    from
    gl_balances Bl,
    gl_code_combinations GCC,
    psb_ws_line_balances_i b ,
    gl_budget_versions bv,
    gl_budgets_v gv
    where
    b.CODE_COMBINATION_ID=gcc.CODE_COMBINATION_ID and bl.CODE_COMBINATION_ID=gcc.CODE_COMBINATION_ID and
    bl.budget_version_id =bv.BUDGET_VERSION_ID and gv.budget_version_id= bv.budget_version_id
    and gv.latest_opened_year in (select latest_opened_year-3 from gl_budgets_v where latest_opened_year=:BUDGET_YEAR )
    group by b.Concatenated_account ,b.Account_description

    Hi,
    If this question is related to SQL then please post in SQL forum.
    Otherwise provide more information how this sql is being used and do you want to tune the SQL or the way it fetches the information from DB and display in OAF.
    Regards,
    Sandeep M.

  • Takes more time to start & shutdown the database

    Hi All,
    I have created a database in oracle9i by following manual steps. Every thing was created successfully and am able to start the database and shutdown also.
    but the problem is while giving the startup command it takes more time to start the database and the same during the shutdown. So anyone help me..
    the follwing are the pfile specifications:
    db_name=practice
    instance_name=practice
    control_files= 'E:\practice\control\control1.ctl',
              'D:\practice\control\control2.ctl'
    db_block_size=2048
    db_cache_size=20m
    shared_pool_size=20m
    background_dump_dest='E:\practice\bdump'
    user_dump_dest='E:\practice\udump'
    Thanks in Advance

    Every thing was created successfully and am able to start the database and > shutdown also.Please restate the above.
    problem is while giving the startup command it takes more time to start the >database and the same during the shutdownHow have you compared? Could it be O/S resources, installation of additional software; you have not mentioned the O/S and complete version of your database.
    You can review the following although I am bit unclear;
    http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/B10501_01/server.920/a96533/instreco.htm#440322
    Adith

  • PDF Form Takes More Time To Open when using designer 7.1.3129.1.296948

    Hi All,
    Adobe Reader Version :  8 and above.
    designer                     : 7.1.3129.1.296948
    When i am devloping the adobe interactive form Using designer 7.1.3129.1.296948, When I open the same in the adobe reader 8.1.2 and 9.1 its take more time (Nearly 20 mins).
    When I am opening the same in the adobe reader 7.1 its opening fine.
    How to resolve This problem in adobe reader 8.1.2,9.0 and 9.1 ?
    Regards,
    Boopathi M

    Hi,
    I have seen this exact same problem happening when, I created/developed a adobe form, on a PC which had adobe livecycle designer 7.1, but had adobe reader 7.
    Once the form is created on a machine which had reader 7, then it does not matter whether u try to open that pdf in reader 8 or 9, it will take 20-30min to open, it will freeze your pc, etc.
    Please ensure that when/where ever the form was first created, that machine had adobe reader 8 or higher installed it.
    I hope this helps,
    Regards,
    Hanoz

  • PDF Form Takes More Time To Open  when using designer 7.1.3129.1.296948 + Reader 8 above

    Hi All,
    When i am developing the adobe interactive form Using designer 7.1.3129.1.296948,After that I converted to PDF.
    When I am opening the PDF form its takes more time(Using reader version 8.1.2).
    How to resolve This problem ?
    Regards,
    Boopathi M

    Hi,
    I have seen this exact same problem happening when, I created/developed a adobe form, on a PC which had adobe livecycle designer 7.1, but had adobe reader 7.
    Once the form is created on a machine which had reader 7, then it does not matter whether u try to open that pdf in reader 8 or 9, it will take 20-30min to open, it will freeze your pc, etc.
    Please ensure that when/where ever the form was first created, that machine had adobe reader 8 or higher installed it.
    I hope this helps,
    Regards,
    Hanoz

  • 'BAPI_GOODSMVT_CREATE' takes more time for creating material document

    Hi Experts,
    I m using 'BAPI_GOODSMVT_CREATE' in my custom report, it takes more time for creating Material documents.
    Please let me know if there is any option to overcome this issue.
    Thanks in advance
    Regards,
    Leo

    Hi,
    please check if some of following OSS notes are not valid for your problem:
    [Note 838036 - AFS: Performance issues during GR with ref. to PO|https://service.sap.com/sap/support/notes/838036]
    [Note 391142 - Performance: Goods receipt for inbound delivery|https://service.sap.com/sap/support/notes/391142]
    [Note 1414418 - Goods receipt for customer returns: Various corrections|https://service.sap.com/sap/support/notes/1414418]
    The other idea is not to commit each call, but executing commit of packages e.g. after 1000 BAPI calls.
    But otherwise, I am afraid you can not do a lot about performance of standard BAPI. Maybe there is some customer enhancement which is taking too long inside the BAPI, but this has to be analysed by you. To analyse performance, just execute your program via tr. SE30.
    Regards
    Adrian

Maybe you are looking for

  • Windows does not recognize ipod touch

    Windows does not recognzie my iPod Touch.  This happened recently as it was recognized previously.  Any suggestions?

  • Enhancement on F.13 to clear line items automatically

    hello friends, i am not able to clear line items with F.13 transaction for special G/L Account..i am inputing the values with the Transactions F-48 and F-43....we can view the details in Tr.code-FBL1N. Can any one help me...plzzz vamshi

  • MOTOROLA ATRIX yahoo mail

    im having a problem with sending mail whilst in my yahoo account. i can view but CANNOT send in 3G mode but strangely I CAN send in wi-fi mode. motorola state there is a known fault with yahoo servers. can anyone shed any light on how to cure ???

  • Using se 6 runtime library on a mac running 1.5

    I have an app that needs to be compatible with 32 bit macs that can only run Java 1.5. So I was hoping that I could just import the SE 6 runtime library and possible fix imports to use the updated imported library rather than the jvms loaded classes.

  • Issue with Script

    Hi Team, I am using this script for monitoring VPN account expiration date. Please check any errors at date function. Every this is working fine but while getting alerts i am getting END Date as below: It should be DD/MM/YYY Format End date 41665 Fun