Higher parse and execute than I expected

I am trying to diagnose a problem. But I'm a bit confused on how the following could happen. How could I get 25 parses on the same SQL statement? I'd expect 1 parse, 25 execute (which is what I get when I run that statement 25 times during a separate trace).
SELECT PROJ_ID
FROM TIMEX.TD_PROJECTS
WHERE PROJ_TYPE = 'LVE'
call     count       cpu    elapsed       disk      query    current        rows
Parse       25      0.03       0.02          0          0          0           0
Execute     25      0.00       0.00          0          0          0           0
Fetch      265      0.16       0.19         31        935          0         250
total      315      0.19       0.21         31        935          0         250
Misses in library cache during parse: 1

"only slightly more amusing than using DBMS_RANDOM"? Seriously Dan? I've got Cary's book & I've been to several of the Hotsos conferences. Method R doesn't necessarily apply here, or if it does, then please give me your targeted approach to implementing it. In my mind, I have to find out where the problem is before I can implement it. If the latch contention in the library cache is causing every session in the db to slow down, and I know that 4 new applications were introduced, then I need to figure out which of those 4 apps is the biggest contributor to the latching problem. Right?
Initial Goal:
Load the system with 1/3 of the upcoming user load, to see if it can handle cutover.
Implementation:
30 people entered application A, performing the work I captured which started my questions in this thread.
12 people in application B, 18 in application C, 5 in application D.
Result: Due to excessive latches in the library cache, the entire system became virtually unavailable.
Next step: without involving 65 people for each test, capture an approximation of their work in their respective application, and use a testing harness find out which one is causing the majority of the latch contention. Then focus on fixing that app.
The concern I have here, is that I want to capture that 1:1 parse-to-execution ratio for that one query, due specifically to the latch contention in the library cache - and it's excessive (and unnecessary) number of executions per user.
If I can't replicate the problem, how can I find the problem areas and fix them?

Similar Messages

Db_files too high and High parse to execute ratio Error

Hi DBAs,
I was using TOAD to check the statistics on our database and got the above
error(db_files too high) against DBWR avg scan depth(3,057.4334) AND ALSO High parse to execute ratio against Parse to execute ratio 83,2903 How do I
deal with these problems ?
Thanks in advance.

Database version ?
9.2.0.4.0
db_files is a parameter. Check what it is set to.
show parameter db_files
NAME TYPE VALUE
db_files integer 200
"High parse to execute ratio" may mean that your code does not use bind variables, so there is not much reuse. It can also be impacted by the setting of parameters cursor_sharing or shared_pool.
show parameter cursor_sharing
NAME TYPE VALUE
cursor_sharing string EXACT
show parameter shared_pool
shows nothing!!!!!!
show parameter sga
NAME TYPE VALUE
lock_sga boolean FALSE
pre_page_sga boolean FALSE
sga_max_size big integer 1612782288
So what do you suggest?
Thanks

High parse to execute ratio

Hi I am using TOAD on my Apex database to check performance of database..
And my PRD system has a 99.7% Parse to Execute ratio, where my UAT system only has a 17% ratio
I did this query
SELECT parse_calls, executions, sql_text
FROM v$sql
WHERE executions = 0 AND parse_calls > 0;And get
PARSES     EXEC     SQL_TEXT
24110     0     SELECT * FROM "DMS"."DMS_EMPLOYEES"
22391     0     SELECT * FROM "DMS"."DMS_DOCKETS"
19296     0     SELECT * FROM "DMS"."DMS_DOCKET_DETAILS"
15231     0     SELECT * FROM "DMS"."DMS_EMPLOYEE_CONTRACTS"
why would it try to be parsing basic tables? to such a high extent?
Dean

Hi,
Please do not post around forum same question.
Re: 99.7% Parse to Execute ratio
Regards,
Jari

Low Execute to Parse % and high soft parse %

Hello Folks
I am working on oracle 10g release2 on HP-UX
After going through awr reports observed it have low Execute to Parse % but high soft parse % (Instance Efficiency Percentages)
so cannot say issue with less use of bind variables,then what is cause of Execute to Parse %
searched sites like ask.tom,burselon counsulting etc as usual they had given generic/diplomatic(escaping) replies on this
like due to problem in application code,ineffecient sharing ,due to problem in database parameters etc
without any clear indication for cause and solution like if some database parameters not set properly then should say which database parameters can be checked,cause due to more parsing and less execution
please share if you had faced such issue and any suggestions to solve this
examples why this could happen ,like possibilities in application code
Thanks

Load Profile
                                          Per Second       Per Transaction
               Redo size:             11,685.79              3,660.98
               Logical reads:             71,445.74             22,382.86
               Block changes:                 70.89                 22.21
               Physical reads:                 58.63                 18.37
               Physical writes:                  2.80                  0.88
               User calls:                652.93                204.55
               Parses:                 48.39                 15.16
               Hard parses:                  0.33                  0.10
               Sorts:                  6.90                  2.16
               Logons:                  0.23                  0.07
               Executes:                 52.71                 16.51
               Transactions:                  3.19
            % Blocks changed per Read:    0.10    Recursive Call %:    30.48
            Rollback per transaction %:    2.57       Rows per Sort:    29.66
    Instance Efficiency Percentages (Target 100%)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
             Buffer Nowait %: 100.00       Redo NoWait %: 100.00
             Buffer Hit   %:   99.92    In-memory Sort %: 100.00
             Library Hit   %:   98.47        Soft Parse %:   99.32
             Execute to Parse %:    8.19         Latch Hit %:   99.63
             Parse CPU to Parse Elapsd %:   89.90     % Non-Parse CPU:   99.62There rdbms performs approximately 48 soft parse per second ,Soft Parse % and Library Hit very close to 99 it means there main part of sql are shared.Also here user calls similar high per second but executions less,however you should be try minimizing soft parsing.I do not know exactly for which interval you get this report but Execute to Parse % indicate that when executing query oracle can not find early cursor handles(open or closed) but it can find sql text and plan information from shared pool according hash values,in this case oracle perform soft parse again.In your case you also investigate shared pool size/fragmentation.To avoid little Execute to Parse % you can increase SESSION_CACHED_CURSORS or implement CURSOR_SPACE_FOR_TIME.So refer documentation and find how to use these parameters.

High parsing with Siebel and Oracle RAC 10gR2

Hi all,
I'm working for a company that uses Siebel 8 with a 2 nodes RAC 10gR2. 70GB SGA with assured minimum values for shared pool 16GB, 50GB db buffer cache and the rest distributed among the other pools.
In the last weeks we are facing a very annoying issue in our production system, at random times we have a very high concurrency peak with contention events like:
- cursor: pin S wait on X
- latch: library cache
and a performance problem as a consequence.
I have read all the documents on metalink about these types of waiting events and how to troubleshoot it, but I can't get rid of this problem.
We have dynamic SGA configured, but we haven't had any resizes in the last weeks.
We didn't have many "version count" for query, we are about <40.
In the AWR I have noticed that we have very high parsing (in most cases query execute=query parse). We have talked to our Siebel support team to propose them the use of CURSOR_SHARING=FORCE, but they told us that it's unsupported.
We have increased the parameter session_cached_cursors from 50 to 1000, but in the last days the problem has even got worse.
I suppose that the solution could be reducing the parse count and elapsed parse time, but without changing the CURSOR_SHARING parameter and not much help from Siebel support, I don't know how to achieve this.
Does anyone have any idea?

The only way you can reduce the number of parses is to fix Siebel (in other words - not much you can do).

Just got my iPad 2 three days ago and noticed the battery life drops faster than I expected at least compared to the others ones around

Just got my iPad 2 three days ago and noticed the battery life drops faster than I expected at least compared to the others ones around, please I need to know the cause and how to effect necessary changes that will prolong the battery life as I have gone through the settings which includes turning off the push notifications, reduce brightness and so on but that doesn't seem to help much.

FYI
The quickest way (and really the only way) to charge your iPad is with the included 10W or 12W (5W on Mini) USB Power Adapter. iPad will also charge, although more slowly, when attached to a computer with a high-power USB port (many recent Mac computers) or with an iPhone Power Adapter (5W). When attached to a computer via a standard USB port (2.5W, most PCs or older Mac computers) iPad will charge very slowly (but iPad indicates not charging). Make sure your computer is on while charging iPad via USB. If iPad is connected to a computer that’s turned off or is in sleep or standby mode, the iPad battery will continue to drain.
Apple recommends that once a month you let the iPad fully discharge & then recharge to 100%.
How to Calibrate Your Mac, iPhone, or iPad Battery
http://www.macblend.com/how-to-calibrate-your-mac-iphone-or-ipad-battery/
At this link http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/galaxy-tab-android-tablet,3014-11.html , tests show that the iPad 2 battery (25 watt-hours) will charge to 90% in 3 hours 1 minute. It will charge to 100% in 4 hours 2 minutes. The new iPad has a larger capacity battery (42 watt-hours), so using the 10W charger will obviously take longer. If you are using your iPad while charging, it will take even longer. It's best to turn your new iPad OFF and charge over night. Also look at The iPad's charging challenge explained http://www.macworld.com/article/1150356/ipadcharging.html
Also, if you have a 3rd generation iPad, look at
Apple: iPad Battery Nothing to Get Charged Up About
http://allthingsd.com/20120327/apple-ipad-battery-nothing-to-get-charged-up-abou t/
Apple Explains New iPad's Continued Charging Beyond 100% Battery Level
http://www.macrumors.com/2012/03/27/apple-explains-new-ipads-continued-charging- beyond-100-battery-level/
New iPad Takes Much Longer to Charge Than iPad 2
http://www.iphonehacks.com/2012/03/new-ipad-takes-much-longer-to-charge-than-ipa d-2.html
Apple Batteries - iPad http://www.apple.com/batteries/ipad.html
iPhone: Hardware troubleshooting (Power/Battery section also applies to iPad)
http://support.apple.com/kb/TS2802
Extend iPad Battery Life (Look at pjl123 comment)
https://discussions.apple.com/thread/3921324?tstart=30
New iPad Slow to Recharge, Barely Charges During Use
http://www.pcworld.com/article/252326/new_ipad_slow_to_recharge_barely_charges_d uring_use.html
Best Practices for iPad Battery Charging
http://www.ilounge.com/index.php/articles/comments/best-practices-for-ipad-batte ry-charging/
Tips About Charging for New iPad 3
http://goodscool-electronics.blogspot.com/2012/04/tips-about-charging-for-new-ip ad-3.html
How to Save and Prolong the battery life of your new ipad
https://discussions.apple.com/thread/4480944?tstart=0
Prolong battery lifespan for iPad / iPad 2 / iPad 3: charging tips
http://thehowto.wikidot.com/prolong-battery-lifespan-for-ipad
iPhone, iPod, Using the iPad Charger
http://support.apple.com/kb/HT4327
Install and use Battery Doctor HD
http://itunes.apple.com/tw/app/battery-doctor-hd/id459702901?mt=8
To Extend a Device’s Battery Life, Get to Know It Better
http://tinyurl.com/b67c7xz
iPad Battery Replacement
http://www.apple.com/batteries/replacements.html
In rare instances when using the Camera Connection Kit, you may notice that iPad does not charge after using the Camera Connection Kit. Disconnecting and reconnecting the iPad from the charger will resolve this issue.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Since you are a new iPad user .....
Complete guide to using iOS 6
http://howto.cnet.com/ios-6-complete-guide/
Guide to Built-In Apps on iOS
https://sites.google.com/site/appleclubfhs/support/advice-and-articles/guide-to- built-in-apps-ios
You can download a complete iOS 5 iPad User Guide and iOS 6 iPad User Guide here: http://support.apple.com/manuals/ipad/
Also, Good Instructions http://www.tcgeeks.com/how-to-use-ipad-2/
Apple - iPad - Guided Tours
http://www.apple.com/ipad/videos/
Apple iPad Guided Tours - Watch the videos see all the amazing iPad apps in action. Learn how to use FaceTime, Mail, Safari, Videos, Maps, iBooks, App Store, and more.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YT2bD0-OqBM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROY4tLyNlsg&feature=relmfu
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QSPXXhmwYf4&feature=relmfu
How to - Articles & User Guides & Tutorials
http://www.iphone-mac.com/index.php/Index/howto/id/4/type/select
iPad How-Tos http://ipod.about.com/lr/ipad_how-tos/903396/1/
You can download an iPad User Guide to the iPad from the iTunes store.
 Cheers, Tom

When I have headphones plugged into my iphone it says warning'' high volume'' and becomes first a red and then plop a number of red pops but it will not be so for someone else I know. My sound will be much lower than anyone else in the music, and when I t

When I have headphones plugged into my iphone it says warning'' high volume'' and becomes first a red and then plop a number of red pops but it will not be so for someone else I know. My sound will be much lower than anyone else in the music, and when I talk by phone headset

Hi! I have the same problem when I use my headphones .
iPhone 4s England, iOS 6.1.2

I don't know exactly when this started, but Winamp became my default search and homepage.. The homepage issue was easy, but the search issue is bigger than I expected. It ALWAYS uses Winamp (Powered by AOL) as my default search. Please help. Thank you.

I don't know exactly when this started, but Winamp became my default search and homepage.. The homepage issue was easy, but the search issue is bigger than I expected. It ALWAYS uses Winamp (Powered by AOL) as my default search. Please help. Thank you.

reinstall it but make sure to uncheck the box next to "make winamp my default search engine"
attached is screenshot from the part of installation proces where that checbox should be unchecked
hope this helps

What is Execute to Parse % and how to tune it when it lower?

What is Execute to Parse % and how to tune it when it is lower?

Gjohn wrote:
What is Execute to Parse % and how to tune it when it is lower?If you don't know what it is, how are you going to decide that you need to tune it.
Here's a little information on how pointless it can be to get too worried about that particular "Instance Efficiency" percentage in Statspack and the AWR: http://jonathanlewis.wordpress.com/2006/12/27/analysing-statspack-2/
Regards
Jonathan Lewis
http://jonathanlewis.wordpress.com
http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk
To post code, statspack/AWR report, execution plans or trace files, start and end the section with the tag {noformat}{noformat} (lowercase, curly brackets, no spaces) so that the text appears in fixed format.
"There's no sense in being precise when you don't even know what you're talking about"
John von Neumann

I'd like to update with MacOSX 10.5.8 to a higher version of Firefox than 3.6.22 and like to know how without buying a new computer

I'd like to update with MacOSX 10.5.8 to a higher version of Firefox than 3.6.22 and like to know, how I can do this without buying a new computer

Download latest Firefox version using one of these links:
* http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/new/
* http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/central/
* http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/fx/
* http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/all.html
Uninstall your current Firefox
* https://support.mozilla.com/en-US/kb/Uninstalling%20Firefox
* DO NOT SELECT TO REMOVE USER DATA AND SETTINGS
Install Firefox using the downloaded & saved Firefox installer file
* https://support.mozilla.com/en-US/kb/Installing%20Firefox%20on%20Windows
Check and tell if its working.

Performance Degradation - High fetches and Prses

Hello,
My analysis on a particular job trace file drew my attention towards:
1) High rate of Parses instead of Bind variables usage.
2) High fetches and poor number/ low number of rows being processed
Please let me kno as to how the performance degradation can be minimised, Perhaps the high number of SQL* Net Client wait events may be due to multiple fetches and transactions with the client.
EXPLAIN PLAN FOR SELECT /*+ FIRST_ROWS (1) */ * FROM SAPNXP.INOB
WHERE MANDT = :A0
AND KLART = :A1
AND OBTAB = :A2
AND OBJEK LIKE :A3 AND ROWNUM <= :A4;
call     count       cpu    elapsed       disk      query    current        rows
Parse      119      0.00       0.00          0          0          0           0
Execute    239      0.16       0.13          0          0          0           0
Fetch      239   2069.31    2127.88          0   13738804          0           0
total      597   2069.47    2128.01          0   13738804          0           0
PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
Plan hash value: 1235313998
| Id | Operation                    | Name   | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT             |        |     2 |   268 |     1   (0)| 00:00:01 |
|* 1 | COUNT STOPKEY               |        |       |       |            |          |
|* 2 |   TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID| INOB   |     2 |   268 |     1   (0)| 00:00:01 |
|* 3 |    INDEX SKIP SCAN           | INOB~2 | 7514 |       |     1   (0)| 00:00:01 |
Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
   1 - filter(ROWNUM<=TO_NUMBER(:A4))
   2 - filter("OBJEK" LIKE :A3 AND "KLART"=:A1)
   3 - access("MANDT"=:A0 AND "OBTAB"=:A2)
       filter("OBTAB"=:A2)
18 rows selected.
SQL> SELECT INDEX_NAME,TABLE_NAME,COLUMN_NAME FROM DBA_IND_COLUMNS WHERE INDEX_OWNER='SAPNXP' AND INDEX_NAME='INOB~2';
INDEX_NAME      TABLE_NAME                     COLUMN_NAME
INOB~2          INOB                           MANDT
INOB~2          INOB                           CLINT
INOB~2          INOB                           OBTAB
Is it possible to Maximise the rows/fetch
call     count       cpu    elapsed       disk      query    current        rows
Parse      163      0.03       0.00          0          0          0           0
Execute    163      0.01       0.03          0          0          0           0
Fetch   174899     55.26      59.14          0    1387649          0     4718932
total   175225     55.30      59.19          0    1387649          0     4718932
Misses in library cache during parse: 0
Optimizer mode: ALL_ROWS
Parsing user id: 27
Rows     Row Source Operation
28952 TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID EDIDC (cr=8505 pr=0 pw=0 time=202797 us)
28952   INDEX RANGE SCAN EDIDC~1 (cr=1457 pr=0 pw=0 time=29112 us)(object id 202995)
Elapsed times include waiting on following events:
Event waited on                             Times   Max. Wait Total Waited
----------------------------------------   Waited ---------- ------------
SQL*Net message to client                  174899        0.00          0.16
SQL*Net more data to client                155767        0.01          5.69
SQL*Net message from client                174899        0.11        208.21
latch: cache buffers chains                     2        0.00          0.00
latch free                                      4        0.00          0.00
********************************************************************************

user4566776 wrote:
My analysis on a particular job trace file drew my attention towards:
1) High rate of Parses instead of Bind variables usage.
But if you look at the text you are using bind variables.
The first query is executed 239 times - which matches the 239 fetches. You cut off some of the useful information from the tkprof output, but the figures show that you're executing more than once per parse call. The time is CPU time spent using a bad execution plan to find no data -- this looks like a bad choice of index, possibly a side effect of the first_rows(1) hint.
2) High fetches and poor number/ low number of rows being processedThe second query is doing a lot of fetches because in 163 executions it is fetching 4.7 million rows at roughly 25 rows per fetch. You might improve performance a little by increasing the array fetch size - but probably not by more than a factor of 2.
You'll notice that even though you record 163 parse calls for the second statement the number of " Misses in library cache during parse" is zero - so the parse calls are pretty irrelevant, the cursor is being re-used.
Regards
Jonathan Lewis
http://jonathanlewis.wordpress.com
http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk
To post code, statspack/AWR report, execution plans or trace files, start and end the section with the tag {noformat}{noformat} (lowercase, curly brackets, no spaces) so that the text appears in fixed format.
"Science is more than a body of knowledge; it is a way of thinking"
Carl Sagan

Performance issue with high CPU and IO

Hi guys,
I am encountering huge user response time on a production system and I don’t know how to solve it.
Doing some extra tests and using the instrumentation that we have in the code we concluded that the DB is the bottleneck.
We generated some AWR reports and noticed the CPU was in top wait events. Also noticed that in a random manner some simple sql take a long time to execute. We activated the sql trace on the system and noticed that for very simple SQLs (unique index access on one table) we have huge exec times. 9s
In the trace file the huge time we had it in fetch area: 9.1s cpu and elapsed 9.2.
And no or very small waits for this specific SQL.
it seems like the bottle neck is on the CPU but at that point there were very few processes running on the DB. Why can we have such a big cpu wait on a simple select? This is a machine with 128 cores. We have quicker responses on machines smaller/busier than this.
We noticed that we had a huge db_cache_size (12G) and after we scale it down we noticed some improvements but not enough. How can I prove that there is a link between high CPU and big cache_size? (there was not wait involved in SQL execution). what can we do in the case we need big DB cache size?
The second issue is that I tried to execute an sql on a big table (FTS on a big table. no join). Again on that smaller machine it runs in 30 seconds and on this machine it runs in 1038 seconds.
Also generated a trace for this SQL on the problematic machine:
call     count       cpu    elapsed       disk      query    current        rows
Parse        1      0.00       0.00          0          0          0           0
Execute      1      0.00       0.00          0          0          0           0
Fetch        1    402.08    1038.31    1842916    6174343          0           1
total        3    402.08    1038.32    1842916    6174343          0           1
db file sequential read                     12419        0.21         40.02
i/o slave wait                             135475        0.51        613.03
db file scattered read                     135475        0.52        675.15
log file switch completion                      5        0.06          0.18
latch: In memory undo latch                     6        0.00          0.00
latch: object queue header operation            1        0.00          0.00
********************************************************************************The high CPU is present here also but here I have huge wait on db file scattered read.
Looking at the session with the select the AWG_wait for db scattered read was 0.5. on the other machine it is like 0.07.
I though this is an IO issue. I did some IO tests at SO level and it seems like the read and writes operation are very fast…much faster than the machine that has the awg_wait smaller. Why the difference in waits?
One difference between these two DBs is that the problem one has the db block size = 16k and the other one has 8k.
I received some reports done at OS level on CPU and IO usage on the problematic machine (in normal operations). It seems like the CPU is very used and the IO stays very low.
On the other machine, the smaller and the faster one, it is other way around.
What is the problem here? How can I test further? Can I link the high CPU to low/slow IO?
we have 10G on sun os with ASM.
Thanks in advance.

Yes, there are many things you can and should do to isolate this. But first check MOS Poor Performance With Oracle9i and 10g Releases When Using Dynamic Intimate Shared Memory (DISM) [ID 1018855.1] isn't messing you up to start.
Also, be sure and post exact patch levels for both Oracle and OS.
Be sure and check all your I/O settings and see what MOS has to say about those.
Are you using ASSM? See Long running update
Since it got a little better with shrinking the SGA size, that might indicate (wild speculation here, something like) one of the problems is simply too much thrashing within the SGA, as oracle decides "small" objects being full scanned in memory is faster than range scans (or whatever) from disk, overloading the cpu, not allowing the cpu to ask for other full scans from I/O. Possibly made worse by row level locking, or some other app issue that just does too much cpu.
You probably have more than one thing wrong. High fetch count might mean you need to adjust the array size on the clients.
Now that that is all out of the way, if you still haven't found the problem, go through http://oracle-randolf.blogspot.com/2009/02/basic-sql-statement-performance.html
Edit: Oh, see Solaris 10 memory management conflicts with Automatic PGA Memory Management [ID 460424.1] too.
Edited by: jgarry on Nov 15, 2011 1:45 PM

Splitting and executing the query for each 1 lac and executing parallel.

Hi All,
We have a table with around 10 keys and each key is having more than millions of records for a given date.
And my requirement is to find the sum of the sale_price of each keys.
( example :
Select key, sum(sale_price) from table1 where date1=sysdate
group by key
Since, each set of key contains more than a millions of records, It's time consumption is too high.
Is thr any way to achieve as below,
For key 1 (assume 1 million records)
and we will spilt these into 100 parts and execute parallelly.
At the end get sum of all 100 parts.
Similarly for other keys....
Is it possible to divide the records into 1 lac each and give it for parallel execution ?

If the key column is also the partition key, I would expect that to work well with parallel query. What have you tried that isn't working? Also what is your Oracle version?

Test program running taking much more time on high end server T5440 than low end server T5220

Hi all,
I have written the following program and run on both T5440 [1.4 GHz, 95 GB RAM, 32 cores(s), 256 logical (virtual) processor(s),] and T5220 [(UltraSPARC-T2 (chipid 0, clock 1165 MH) , 8GB RAM, 1 core, 8 virtual processors )] on same OS version. I found that T5540 server takes more time than T5220. Please find below the details.
test1.cpp
#include <iostream>
#include <pthread.h>
using namespace std;
#define NUM_OF_THREADS 20
struct ABCDEF {
char A[1024];
char B[1024];
void *start_func(void *)
    long long i = 6000;
    while(i--)
                ABCDEF*             sdf = new ABCDEF;
                delete sdf;
                sdf = NULL;
    return NULL;
int main(int argc, char* argv[])
    pthread_t tid[50];
    for(int i=0; i<NUM_OF_THREADS; i++)
                pthread_create(&tid[i], NULL, start_func, NULL);
                cout<<"Creating thread " << i <<endl;
    for(int i=0; i<NUM_OF_THREADS; i++)
                pthread_join(tid[i], NULL);
                cout<<"Waiting for thread " << i <<endl;
After executing the above program on T5440 takes :
real 0.78
user 3.94s
sys 0.05
After executing the above program on T5220 takes :
real 0.23
user 1.43s
sys 0.03
It seems that T5440 which is high end server takes almost 3 times more time than T5220 which is low end server.
However, I have one more observation. I tried the following program :
test2.cpp
#include <iostream>
#include <pthread.h>
using namespace std;
#define NUM_OF_THREADS 20
struct ABCDEF {
char A[1024];
char B[1024];
int main(int argc, char* argv[])
    long long i = 6000000;
    while(i--)
        ABCDEF* sdf = new ABCDEF;
        delete sdf;
        sdf = NULL;
    return 0;
It seems that T5440 server is fast in this case as compaired to T5220 server.
Could anyone please help me out the exact reason for this behaviour as my application is slow as well on this T5440 server. I have posted earlier as well for the same issue.
Thanks in advance !!!
regards,
Sanjay

You already asked this question...
48 hours earlier, and in the same Solaris forum space
Repeating the post isn't going to get you a response any faster, and actually now have people NOT respond because you are not showing any patience.
These are end-user community forums, not a place to expect Oracle Technical Support.   There is no obligation that there be a response.
If you have a business-critical issue and hope to get accurate and timely response, then use your service contract credentials to open a Support request.
This new redundant post is locked.
Edit:
It appears that at the same time the O.P. posted this redundant thread, they also posted the same question to at least one other forum web site:
http://www.unix.com/solaris/229269-test-program-running-taking-much-more-time-high-end-server-t5440-than-low-end-server-t5220.html

Error occurred while parsing: Start of root element expected.

This my code i use to try inserting xml data:
v_BFile := BFILENAME('XML_DIR',v_xmlfile);
DBMS_LOB.createTemporary(v_clob, cache=>false);
DBMS_LOB.open(v_bFile, DBMS_LOB.lob_readonly);
DBMS_LOB.loadFromFile(v_clob,v_BFile,DBMS_LOB.getLength(v_bfile));
DBMS_LOB.close(v_bfile);
v_parser := XMLPARSER.newParser;
XMLPARSER.parseClob(v_parser,v_clob);
On the parseClob is get the error message: Error occurred while parsing: Start of root element expected.
My xml is as follows
<?xml version="1.0" ?>
<EMPLOYEES>
<EMP>
<EMPNO>8000</EMPNO>
<ENAME>JONES</ENAME>
<JOB>DBA</JOB>
<MGR>7839</MGR>
<HIREDATE>07-MAY-2002</HIREDATE>
<SAL>100</SAL>
<COMM>10</COMM>
<DEPTNO>10</DEPTNO>
</EMP>
<EMP>
<EMPNO>8001</EMPNO>
<ENAME>SMITH</ENAME>
<JOB>PROG</JOB>
<MGR />
<HIREDATE>01-MAY-2002</HIREDATE>
<SAL>200</SAL>
<COMM>10</COMM>
<DEPTNO>10</DEPTNO>
</EMP>
</EMPLOYEES>
What do i do wrong. Can someone help me

Kurt
Can you answer the following questions
Which Release of the database are you using ?
What is the database character set ?
What is the character set encoding of the source document ?
Remember that the loadFromFile procedure is designed to load binary data, and does not convert data into the database character set. If the database character set is UTF8, then the CLOB data has to be UCS2.
Can you dump the contents of the CLOB
If you are using 9iR2 then you can use the new procedure GetCLOBFromFile which will perform the correct coversions.
Also in 9iR2 we would recommend the use of the DBMS_XMLPARSER package, rather than the XMLPARSER package. The reason for this is the DBMS_XMLPARSER makes use of a 'C' based parser, running as native compiled code, which XMLPARSER still uses the Java based version of the parser. Performance with DBMS_XMLPARSER is much better.
Hope this helps

Higher parse and execute than I expected

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for