Performance issue with XLA tables and GL tables R12

Hi all,
I have one SQL that joins all the XLA tables with GL tables to get invoice related encumbrance data.
My problem is for some reason the SQL is going to GL_LE_LINES first (from explain plane). As
a result my SQL is taking some 25 min to finish.
I am pretty sure if I can manage to force the SQL to use XLA table 1st the SQL will finish in couple of
minutes. I even tried LEADING hint. But, it didn't work.
Can someone help me?
SELECT poh.segment1,
                    tmp.closed_code,
                    gcc.segment1,
                    gcc.segment2,
                    gcc.segment3,
                    gcc.segment4,
                    gcc.segment5,
                    gcc.segment6,
                    gcc.segment7,
                    SUM (NVL (gjl.entered_dr, 0) - NVL (gjl.entered_cr, 0))
               FROM apps.up_po_encumb_relief_tmp_nb TMP,
                    apps.po_headers_all POH,
                    apps.po_distributions_all pod,
                    apps.ap_invoice_distributions_all APID,
                    xla.xla_transaction_entities XTE,
                    xla_events XE,
                    apps.xla_ae_headers XAH,
                    apps.xla_ae_lines XAL,
                    apps.gl_import_references GIR, -- DOUBLE CHECK JOIN CONDITIONS ON THIS TO INCLUDE OTHER COLS
                    apps.gl_je_lines GJL,
                    apps.gl_je_headers GJH,
                    apps.gl_code_combinations GCC
              WHERE     POH.segment1 = TMP.PO_NUMBER
                    AND POH.PO_HEADER_ID = POD.PO_HEADER_ID
                    AND POD.Po_distribution_id = APID.po_distribution_id
                    AND XTE.APPLICATION_ID = 200                           -- Payables
                    AND XTE.SOURCE_ID_INT_1 = APID.INVOICE_ID       --POH.po_header_id
                    AND XTE.ENTITY_ID = XE.ENTITY_ID
                    AND XTE.APPLICATION_ID = XE.APPLICATION_ID
                    AND XAH.ENTITY_ID = XE.ENTity_ID
                    AND XAH.EVENT_ID = XE.EVENT_ID
                    AND XAH.APPLICATION_ID = XE.APPLICATION_ID
                    AND XAL.AE_HEADER_ID = XAH.AE_HEADER_ID
                    AND XAL.APPLICATION_ID = XAH.APPLICATION_ID
                    AND GIR.gl_sl_link_table = XAL.gl_sl_link_table
                    AND GIR.gl_sl_link_id = XAL.gl_sl_link_id
                    AND GJL.je_header_id = GIR.je_header_id
                    AND GJL.je_line_num = GIR.je_line_num
                    AND GJH.je_header_id = GJL.je_header_id
                    AND GJH.status = 'P'
                    AND POD.code_combination_id = GJL.code_combination_id
                    AND GJL.code_combination_id = GCC.code_combination_id
                    AND GCC.enabled_flag = 'Y'
                    AND GJH.je_source = 'Payables'
                    AND GJH.je_category = 'Purchase Invoices'
                    AND GJH.encumbrance_type_id IN (1001, 1002)
                    AND GJH.actual_flag = 'E'
                    AND GJH.status = 'P'
                    AND (NVL (GJL.entered_dr, 0) != 0 OR NVL (GJL.entered_cr, 0) != 0)
           GROUP BY poh.segment1,
                    tmp.closed_code,
                    gcc.segment1,
                    gcc.segment2,
                    gcc.segment3,
                    gcc.segment4,
                    gcc.segment5,
                    gcc.segment6,
                    gcc.segment7;

Hi,
did you
- check table statistics (have the affected tables been analyzed recently)?
- check explain plan for full table scans? You are using NVL on gjl.entered_dr
and gjl.entered_cr which may lead to a full table scan, as far as i know, there
is no (standard) functional index on both columns.
Regards

Similar Messages

Performance issue with select query and for all entries.

hi,
i have a report to be performance tuned.
the database table has around 20 million entries and 25 fields.
so, the report fetches the distinct values of two fields using one select query.
so, the first select query fetches around 150 entries from the table for 2 fields.
then it applies some logic and eliminates some entries and makes entries around 80-90...
and then it again applies the select query on the same table using for all entries applied on the internal table with 80-90 entries...
in short,
it accesses the same database table twice.
so, i tried to get the database table in internal table and apply the logic on internal table and delete the unwanted entries.. but it gave me memory dump, and it wont take that huge amount of data into abap memory...
is around 80-90 entries too much for using "for all entries"?
the logic that is applied to eliminate the entries from internal table is too long, and hence cannot be converted into where clause to convert it into single select..
i really cant find the way out...
please help.

chinmay kulkarni wrote:Chinmay,
Even though you tried to ask the question with detailed explanation, unfortunately it is still not clear.
It is perfectly fine to access the same database twice. If that is working for you, I don't think there is any need to change the logic. As Rob mentioned, 80 or 8000 records is not a problem in "for all entries" clause.
>
> so, i tried to get the database table in internal table and apply the logic on internal table and delete the unwanted entries.. but it gave me memory dump, and it wont take that huge amount of data into abap memory...
>
It is not clear what you tried to do here. Did you try to bring all 20 million records into an internal table? That will certainly cause the program to short dump with memory shortage.
> the logic that is applied to eliminate the entries from internal table is too long, and hence cannot be converted into where clause to convert it into single select..
>
That is fine. Actually, it is better (performance wise) to do much of the work in ABAP than writing a complex WHERE clause that might bog down the database.

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

Is there a recommended limit on the number of custom sections and the cells per table so that there are no performance issues with the UI?

Is there a recommended limit on the number of custom sections and the cells per table so that there are no performance issues with the UI?

Thanks Kelly,
The answers would be the following:
1200 cells per custom section (NEW COUNT), and up to 30 custom sections per spec.
Assuming all will be populated, and this would apply to all final material specs in the system which could be ~25% of all material specs.
The cells will be numeric, free text, drop downs, and some calculated numeric.
Are we reaching the limits for UI performance?
Thanks

Performance issues with pipelined table functions

I am testing pipelined table functions to be able to re-use the base_query function. Contrary to my understanding, the with_pipeline procedure runs 6 time slower than the legacy no_pipeline procedure. Am I missing something? The processor function is from [url http://www.oracle-developer.net/display.php?id=429]improving performance with pipelined table functions .
Edit: The underlying query returns 500,000 rows in about 3 minutes. So there are are no performance issues with the query itself.
Many thanks in advance.
CREATE OR REPLACE PACKAGE pipeline_example
IS
 TYPE resultset_typ IS REF CURSOR;
 TYPE row_typ IS RECORD (colC VARCHAR2(200), colD VARCHAR2(200), colE VARCHAR2(200));
 TYPE table_typ IS TABLE OF row_typ;
 FUNCTION base_query (argA IN VARCHAR2, argB IN VARCHAR2)
 RETURN resultset_typ;
 c_default_limit CONSTANT PLS_INTEGER := 100;
 FUNCTION processor (
 p_source_data IN resultset_typ,
 p_limit_size IN PLS_INTEGER DEFAULT c_default_limit)
 RETURN table_typ
 PIPELINED
 PARALLEL_ENABLE(PARTITION p_source_data BY ANY);
 PROCEDURE with_pipeline (argA IN VARCHAR2,
 argB IN VARCHAR2,
 o_resultset OUT resultset_typ);
 PROCEDURE no_pipeline (argA IN VARCHAR2,
 argB IN VARCHAR2,
 o_resultset OUT resultset_typ);
END pipeline_example;
CREATE OR REPLACE PACKAGE BODY pipeline_example
IS
 FUNCTION base_query (argA IN VARCHAR2, argB IN VARCHAR2)
 RETURN resultset_typ
 IS
 o_resultset resultset_typ;
 BEGIN
 OPEN o_resultset FOR
 SELECT colC, colD, colE
 FROM some_table
 WHERE colA = ArgA AND colB = argB;
 RETURN o_resultset;
 END base_query;
 FUNCTION processor (
 p_source_data IN resultset_typ,
 p_limit_size IN PLS_INTEGER DEFAULT c_default_limit)
 RETURN table_typ
 PIPELINED
 PARALLEL_ENABLE(PARTITION p_source_data BY ANY)
 IS
 aa_source_data table_typ;-- := table_typ ();
 BEGIN
 LOOP
 FETCH p_source_data
 BULK COLLECT INTO aa_source_data
 LIMIT p_limit_size;
 EXIT WHEN aa_source_data.COUNT = 0;
 /* Process the batch of (p_limit_size) records... */
 FOR i IN 1 .. aa_source_data.COUNT
 LOOP
 PIPE ROW (aa_source_data (i));
 END LOOP;
 END LOOP;
 CLOSE p_source_data;
 RETURN;
 END processor;
 PROCEDURE with_pipeline (argA IN VARCHAR2,
 argB IN VARCHAR2,
 o_resultset OUT resultset_typ)
 IS
 BEGIN
 OPEN o_resultset FOR
 SELECT /*+ PARALLEL(t, 5) */ colC,
 SUM (CASE WHEN colD > colE AND colE != '0' THEN colD / ColE END)de,
 SUM (CASE WHEN colE > colD AND colD != '0' THEN colE / ColD END)ed,
 SUM (CASE WHEN colD = colE AND colD != '0' THEN '1' END) de_one,
 SUM (CASE WHEN colD = '0' OR colE = '0' THEN '0' END) de_zero
 FROM TABLE (processor (base_query (argA, argB),100)) t
 GROUP BY colC
 ORDER BY colC
 END with_pipeline;
 PROCEDURE no_pipeline (argA IN VARCHAR2,
 argB IN VARCHAR2,
 o_resultset OUT resultset_typ)
 IS
 BEGIN
 OPEN o_resultset FOR
 SELECT colC,
 SUM (CASE WHEN colD > colE AND colE != '0' THEN colD / ColE END)de,
 SUM (CASE WHEN colE > colD AND colD != '0' THEN colE / ColD END)ed,
 SUM (CASE WHEN colD = colE AND colD != '0' THEN 1 END) de_one,
 SUM (CASE WHEN colD = '0' OR colE = '0' THEN '0' END) de_zero
 FROM (SELECT colC, colD, colE
 FROM some_table
 WHERE colA = ArgA AND colB = argB)
 GROUP BY colC
 ORDER BY colC;
 END no_pipeline;
END pipeline_example;
ALTER PACKAGE pipeline_example COMPILE;Edited by: Earthlink on Nov 14, 2010 9:47 AM
Edited by: Earthlink on Nov 14, 2010 11:31 AM
Edited by: Earthlink on Nov 14, 2010 11:32 AM
Edited by: Earthlink on Nov 20, 2010 12:04 PM
Edited by: Earthlink on Nov 20, 2010 12:54 PM

Earthlink wrote:
Contrary to my understanding, the with_pipeline procedure runs 6 time slower than the legacy no_pipeline procedure. Am I missing something? Well, we're missing a lot here.
Like:
- a database version
- how did you test
- what data do you have, how is it distributed, indexed
and so on.
If you want to find out what's going on then use a TRACE with wait events.
All nessecary steps are explained in these threads:
HOW TO: Post a SQL statement tuning request - template posting
http://oracle-randolf.blogspot.com/2009/02/basic-sql-statement-performance.html
Another nice one is RUNSTATS:
http://asktom.oracle.com/pls/asktom/ASKTOM.download_file?p_file=6551378329289980701

Performance issues with version enable partitioned tables?

Hi all,
Are there any known performance issues with version enable partitioned tables?
Ive been doing some performance testes with a large version enable partitioned table and it seems that OCB optimiser is choosing very expensive plans during merge operations.
Tanks in advance,
Vitor
Example:
 Object Name Rows Bytes Cost Object Node In/Out PStart PStop
UPDATE STATEMENT Optimizer Mode=CHOOSE 1 249
UPDATE SIG.SIG_QUA_IMG_LT
NESTED LOOPS SEMI 1 266 249
PARTITION RANGE ALL 1 9
TABLE ACCESS FULL SIG.SIG_QUA_IMG_LT 1 259 2 1 9
VIEW SYS.VW_NSO_1 1 7 247
NESTED LOOPS 1 739 247
NESTED LOOPS 1 677 247
NESTED LOOPS 1 412 246
NESTED LOOPS 1 114 244
INDEX RANGE SCAN WMSYS.MODIFIED_TABLES_PK 1 62 2
INDEX RANGE SCAN SIG.QIM_PK 1 52 243
TABLE ACCESS BY GLOBAL INDEX ROWID SIG.SIG_QUA_IMG_LT 1 298 2 ROWID ROW L
INDEX RANGE SCAN SIG.SIG_QUA_IMG_PKI$ 1 1
INDEX RANGE SCAN WMSYS.WM$NEXTVER_TABLE_NV_INDX 1 265 1
INDEX UNIQUE SCAN WMSYS.MODIFIED_TABLES_PK 1 62
/* Formatted on 2004/04/19 18:57 (Formatter Plus v4.8.0) */
UPDATE /*+ USE_NL(Z1) ROWID(Z1) */sig.sig_qua_img_lt z1
SET z1.nextver =
SYS.ltutil.subsversion
(z1.nextver,
SYS.ltutil.getcontainedverinrange (z1.nextver,
'SIG.SIG_QUA_IMG',
'NpCyPCX3dkOAHSuBMjGioQ==',
4574,
4575
4574
WHERE z1.ROWID IN (
(SELECT /*+ ORDERED USE_NL(T1) USE_NL(T2) USE_NL(J2) USE_NL(J3)
INDEX(T1 QIM_PK) INDEX(T2 SIG_QUA_IMG_PKI$)
INDEX(J2 WM$NEXTVER_TABLE_NV_INDX) INDEX(J3 MODIFIED_TABLES_PK) */
t2.ROWID
FROM (SELECT /*+ INDEX(WM$MODIFIED_TABLES MODIFIED_TABLES_PK) */
UNIQUE VERSION
FROM wmsys.wm$modified_tables
WHERE table_name = 'SIG.SIG_QUA_IMG'
AND workspace = 'NpCyPCX3dkOAHSuBMjGioQ=='
AND VERSION > 4574
AND VERSION <= 4575) j1,
sig.sig_qua_img_lt t1,
sig.sig_qua_img_lt t2,
wmsys.wm$nextver_table j2,
(SELECT /*+ INDEX(WM$MODIFIED_TABLES MODIFIED_TABLES_PK) */
UNIQUE VERSION
FROM wmsys.wm$modified_tables
WHERE table_name = 'SIG.SIG_QUA_IMG'
AND workspace = 'NpCyPCX3dkOAHSuBMjGioQ=='
AND VERSION > 4574
AND VERSION <= 4575) j3
WHERE t1.VERSION = j1.VERSION
AND t1.ima_id = t2.ima_id
AND t1.qim_inf_esq_x_tile = t2.qim_inf_esq_x_tile
AND t1.qim_inf_esq_y_tile = t2.qim_inf_esq_y_tile
AND t2.nextver != '-1'
AND t2.nextver = j2.next_vers
AND j2.VERSION = j3.VERSION))

Hello Vitor,
There are currently no known issues with version enabled tables that are partitioned. The merge operation may need to access all of the partitions of a table depending on the data that needs to be moved/copied from the child to the parent. This is the reason for the 'Partition Range All' step in the plan that you provided. The majority of the remaining steps are due to the hints that have been added, since this plan has provided the best performance for us in the past for this particular statement. If this is not the case for you, and you feel that another plan would yield better performance, then please let me know and I will take a look at it.
One suggestion would be to make sure that the table was been recently analyzed so that the optimizer has the most current data about the table.
Performance issues are very hard to fix without a reproducible test case, so it may be advisable to file a TAR if you continue to have significant performance issues with the mergeWorkspace operation.
Thank You,
Ben

Performance issue with MSEG table

Hi all,
I need to fetch materials(MATNR) based on the service order number (AUFNR) in the selection screen,but there is performance isssue with this , how to over come this issue .
Regards ,
Amit

Hi,
There could be various reasons for performance issue with MSEG.
1) database statistics of tables and indexes are not upto date.
because of this wrong index is choosen during the execution.
2) Improper indexes, because there is no indexes with the fields mentioned in the WHERE clause of the statement. Because of this reason, CBO would have choosen wrong index and did a range scan.
3) Optimizer bug in oracle.
4) Size of table is very huge, archive.
Better switch on ST05 trace before you run this statements, so it will give more detailed information, where exactly time being spent during the execution.
Hope this helps
dileep

Difference between Temp table and Variable table and which one is better performance wise?

Hello,
Anyone could you explain What is difference between Temp Table (#, ##) and Variable table (DECLARE @V TABLE (EMP_ID INT)) ?
Which one is recommended to use for better performance?
also Is it possible to create CLUSTER and NONCLUSTER Index on Variable table?
In my case: 1-2 days transactional data are more than 3-4 Millions. I tried using both # and table variable and found table variable is faster.
Is that Table variable using Memory or Disk space?
Thanks Shiven:) If Answer is Helpful, Please Vote

Check following link to see differences b/w TempTable & TableVariable: http://sqlwithmanoj.com/2010/05/15/temporary-tables-vs-table-variables/
TempTables & TableVariables both use memory & tempDB in similar manner, check this blog post: http://sqlwithmanoj.com/2010/07/20/table-variables-are-not-stored-in-memory-but-in-tempdb/
Performance wise if you are dealing with millions of records then TempTable is ideal, as you can create explicit indexes on top of them. But if there are less records then TableVariables are good suited.
On Tables Variable explicit index are not allowed, if you define a PK column, then a Clustered Index will be created automatically.
But it also depends upon specific scenarios you are dealing with , can you share it?
~manoj | email: http://scr.im/m22g
http://sqlwithmanoj.wordpress.com
MCCA 2011 | My FB Page

Performance issues while query data from a table having large records

Hi all,
I have a performance issues on the queries on mtl_transaction_accounts table which has around 48,000,000 rows. One of the query is as below
SQL ID: 98pqcjwuhf0y6 Plan Hash: 3227911261
SELECT SUM (B.BASE_TRANSACTION_VALUE)
FROM
MTL_TRANSACTION_ACCOUNTS B , MTL_PARAMETERS A
WHERE A.ORGANIZATION_ID = B.ORGANIZATION_ID
AND A.ORGANIZATION_ID = :b1
AND B.REFERENCE_ACCOUNT = A.MATERIAL_ACCOUNT
AND B.TRANSACTION_DATE <= LAST_DAY (TO_DATE (:b2 , 'MON-YY' ) )
AND B.ACCOUNTING_LINE_TYPE != 15
call count cpu elapsed disk query current rows
Parse 1 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0
Execute 3 0.02 0.05 0 0 0 0
Fetch 3 134.74 722.82 847951 1003824 0 2
total 7 134.76 722.87 847951 1003824 0 2
Misses in library cache during parse: 1
Misses in library cache during execute: 2
Optimizer mode: ALL_ROWS
Parsing user id: 193 (APPS)
Number of plan statistics captured: 1
Rows (1st) Rows (avg) Rows (max) Row Source Operation
 1 1 1 SORT AGGREGATE (cr=469496 pr=397503 pw=0 time=237575841 us)
 788242 788242 788242 NESTED LOOPS (cr=469496 pr=397503 pw=0 time=337519154 us cost=644 size=5920 card=160)
 1 1 1 TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID MTL_PARAMETERS (cr=2 pr=0 pw=0 time=59 us cost=1 size=10 card=1)
 1 1 1 INDEX UNIQUE SCAN MTL_PARAMETERS_U1 (cr=1 pr=0 pw=0 time=40 us cost=0 size=0 card=1)(object id 181399)
 788242 788242 788242 TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID MTL_TRANSACTION_ACCOUNTS (cr=469494 pr=397503 pw=0 time=336447304 us cost=643 size=4320 card=160)
 8704356 8704356 8704356 INDEX RANGE SCAN MTL_TRANSACTION_ACCOUNTS_N3 (cr=28826 pr=28826 pw=0 time=27109752 us cost=28 size=0 card=7316)(object id 181802)
Rows Execution Plan
 0 SELECT STATEMENT MODE: ALL_ROWS
 1 SORT (AGGREGATE)
788242 NESTED LOOPS
 1 TABLE ACCESS MODE: ANALYZED (BY INDEX ROWID) OF
 'MTL_PARAMETERS' (TABLE)
 1 INDEX MODE: ANALYZED (UNIQUE SCAN) OF
 'MTL_PARAMETERS_U1' (INDEX (UNIQUE))
788242 TABLE ACCESS MODE: ANALYZED (BY INDEX ROWID) OF
 'MTL_TRANSACTION_ACCOUNTS' (TABLE)
8704356 INDEX MODE: ANALYZED (RANGE SCAN) OF
 'MTL_TRANSACTION_ACCOUNTS_N3' (INDEX)
Elapsed times include waiting on following events:
Event waited on Times Max. Wait Total Waited
---------------------------------------- Waited ---------- ------------
row cache lock 29 0.00 0.02
SQL*Net message to client 2 0.00 0.00
db file sequential read 847951 0.40 581.90
latch: object queue header operation 3 0.00 0.00
latch: gc element 14 0.00 0.00
gc cr grant 2-way 3 0.00 0.00
latch: gcs resource hash 1 0.00 0.00
SQL*Net message from client 2 0.00 0.00
gc current block 3-way 1 0.00 0.00
********************************************************************************On a 5 node rac environment the program completes in 15 hours whereas on a single node environemnt the program completes in 2 hours.
Is there any way I can improve the performance of this query?
Regards
Edited by: mhosur on Dec 10, 2012 2:41 AM
Edited by: mhosur on Dec 10, 2012 2:59 AM
Edited by: mhosur on Dec 11, 2012 10:32 PM

CREATE INDEX mtl_transaction_accounts_n0
ON mtl_transaction_accounts (
 transaction_date
 , organization_id
 , reference_account
 , accounting_line_type
/:p

Performance issues with Oracle EE 9.2.0.4 and RedHat 2.1

Hello,
I am having some serious performance issues with Oracle Enterprise Edition 9.2.0.4 and RedHat Linux 2.1. The processor goes berserk at 100% for long (some 5 min.) periods of time, and all the ram memory gets used.
Some environment characteristics:
Machine: Intel Pentium IV 2.0GHz with 1GB of RAM.
OS: RedHat Linux 2.1 Enterprise.
Oracle: Oracle Enterprise Edition 9.2.0.4
Application: We have a small web-application with 10 users (for now) and very basic queries (all in stored procedures). Also we use the latest version of ODP.NET with default connection settings (some low pooling, etc).
Does anyone know what could be going on?
Is anybody else having this similar behavior?
We change from SQL-Server so we are not the world expert on the matter. But we want a reliable system nonetheless.
Please help us out, gives some tips, tricks, or guides
Thanks to all,
Frank

Thank you very much and sorry I couldnt write sooner. It seems that the administrator doesnt see the kswap going on so much, so I dont really know what is going on.
We are looking at some queries and some indexing but this is nuts, if I had some poor queries, which we dont really, the server would show pick right?
But he goes crazy and has two oracle processes taking all the resources. There seems to be little swapping going on.
Son now what? They are all ready talking about MS-SQL please help me out here, this is crazy!!!
We have, may be the most powerful combinations here. What is oracle doing?
We even kill the Working Process of the IIS and have no one do anything with the database and still dose two processes going on.
Can some one help me?
Thanks,
Frank

Performance issues with Motion (position, scale, rotate) and GTX 590

I'm experiencing performance issues with my Premiere Pro CC when I scale, position or rotate a clip in the program monitor.
I have no performance issues with playback! It's only, when i move something with the mouse or by changing the x,y-values of Position in the Motion-Dialog in video effects.
Premiere then lags terribly and updates the program monitor only about once per second - this makes it very difficult and cumbersome to work and position things.
On a second Premiere installation on my laptop, performance is fine and fluid - allthough it doesn't have GPU support and is a much slower computer.
I'm pretty sure this has somehow to do with my graphic card, which is a Nvidia GTX 590.
I was told by the support, that it is actually a dual graphic card, which is not supported/liked by Premiere.
The thing is, until the latest Premiere update, I did not have performance issues at all with this card.
I also read on the forum that others with the GTX 590 did not experience any problems with it
So where does this come from?
There is no change in performance whether or not I activate Mercury Playback Engine GPU acceleration.
I also tried deactivating one of the 2 gpus, but there also was no change.
Does anyone else know this problem and has anyone a solution?
I'm running Premiere CC on a Win 7 64bit engine, Nvidia GTX 590, latest driver (of today),

I am suffering from the same phenomenon since I updated just before christmas, I think.
I am hardly able to do scaling, rotating and translating in the program monitor itslef - whil motion has been highlighted in teh effect controls.
In the effect controls I can scale, rotate etc however.
Also I have noticed there is a yellow box with handles in teh program monitor. I remember it was white before.
I cannot figure out what to change in my preferences. What has happened?
best,
Hans Wessels
Premiere CC
Mac Pro OSX 10.7.5
16 GB 1066 MHz DD3
2 X NVIDIA GeForce GT 120 512 MB

I HAVE A SOURCE TABLE WITH 10 RECORDS AND TARGET TABLE 15 RECORDS. MY WUESTION IS USING WITH THE TABLE COMPARISON TRANSFORM I WANT TO DELETE UNMATCHED RECORDS FROM THE TARGET TABLE ??

I HAVE A SOURCE TABLE WITH 10 RECORDS AND TARGET TABLE 15 RECORDS. MY QUESTION IS USING WITH THE TABLE COMPARISON TRANSFORM .I WANT TO DELETE UNMATCHED RECORDS FROM THE TARGET TABLE ?? HOW IT IS ??

Hi Kishore,
First identify deleted records by selecting "Detect deleted rows from comparison table" feature in Table Comparison
Then Use Map Operation with Input row type as "delete" and output row type as "delete" to delete records from target table.

RE: Case 59063: performance issues w/ C TLIB and Forte3M

Hi James,
Could you give me a call, I am at my desk.
I had meetings all day and couldn't respond to your calls earlier.
-----Original Message-----
From: James Min [mailto:jminbrio.forte.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2000 2:50 PM
To: Sharma, Sandeep; Pyatetskiy, Alexander
Cc: sophiaforte.com; kenlforte.com; Tenerelli, Mike
Subject: Re: Case 59063: performance issues w/ C TLIB and Forte 3M
Hello,
I just want to reiterate that we are very committed to working on
this issue, and that our goal is to find out the root of the problem. But
first I'd like to narrow down the avenues by process of elimination.
Open Cursor is something that is commonly used in today's RDBMS. I
know that you must test your query in ISQL using some kind of execute
immediate, but Sybase should be able to handle an open cursor. I was
wondering if your Sybase expert commented on the fact that the server is
not responding to commonly used command like 'open cursor'. According to
our developer, we are merely following the API from Sybase, and open cursor
is not something that particularly slows down a query for several minutes
(except maybe the very first time). The logs show that Forte is waiting for
a status from the DB server. Actually, using prepared statements and open
cursor ends up being more efficient in the long run.
Some questions:
1) Have you tried to do a prepared statement with open cursor in your ISQL
session? If so, did it have the same slowness?
2) How big is the table you are querying? How many rows are there? How many
are returned?
3) When there is a hang in Forte, is there disk-spinning or CPU usage in
the database server side? On the Forte side? Absolutely no activity at all?
We actually have a Sybase set-up here, and if you wish, we could test out
your database and Forte PEX here. Since your queries seems to be running
off of only one table, this might be the best option, as we could look at
everything here, in house. To do this:
a) BCP out the data into a flat file. (character format to make it portable)
b) we need a script to create the table and indexes.
c) the Forte PEX file of the app to test this out.
d) the SQL staement that you issue in ISQL for comparison.
If the situation warrants, we can give a concrete example of
possible errors/bugs to a developer. Dial-in is still an option, but to be
able to look at the TOOL code, database setup, etc. without the limitations
of dial-up may be faster and more efficient. Please let me know if you can
provide this, as well as the answers to the above questions, or if you have
any questions.
Regards,
At 08:05 AM 3/30/00 -0500, Sharma, Sandeep wrote:
James, Ken:
FYI, see attached response from our Sybase expert, Dani Sasmita. She has
already tried what you suggested and results are enclosed.
++
Sandeep
-----Original Message-----
From: SASMITA, DANIAR
Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2000 6:43 PM
To: Pyatetskiy, Alexander
Cc: Sharma, Sandeep; Tenerelli, Mike
Subject: Re: FW: Case 59063: Select using LIKE has performance
issues
w/ CTLIB and Forte 3M
We did that trick already.
When it is hanging, I can see what is doing.
It is doing OPEN CURSOR. But not clear the exact statement of the cursor
it is trying to open.
When we run the query directly to Sybase, not using Forte, it is clearly
not opening any cursor.
And running it directly to Sybase many times, the response is always
consistently fast.
It is just when the query runs from Forte to Sybase, it opens a cursor.
But again, in the Forte code, Alex is not using any cursor.
In trying to capture the query,we even tried to audit any statementcoming
to Sybase. Same thing, just open cursor. No cursor declaration anywhere.==============================================
James Min
Technical Support Engineer - Forte Tools
Sun Microsystems, Inc.
1800 Harrison St., 17th Fl.
Oakland, CA 94612
james.minsun.com
510.869.2056
==============================================
Support Hotline: 510-451-5400
CUSTOMERS open a NEW CASE with Technical Support:
http://www.forte.com/support/case_entry.html
CUSTOMERS view your cases and enter follow-up transactions:
http://www.forte.com/support/view_calls.html

Earthlink wrote:
Contrary to my understanding, the with_pipeline procedure runs 6 time slower than the legacy no_pipeline procedure. Am I missing something? Well, we're missing a lot here.
Like:
- a database version
- how did you test
- what data do you have, how is it distributed, indexed
and so on.
If you want to find out what's going on then use a TRACE with wait events.
All nessecary steps are explained in these threads:
HOW TO: Post a SQL statement tuning request - template posting
http://oracle-randolf.blogspot.com/2009/02/basic-sql-statement-performance.html
Another nice one is RUNSTATS:
http://asktom.oracle.com/pls/asktom/ASKTOM.download_file?p_file=6551378329289980701

Performance issues with Homesharing?

I have a Time Capsule as the base station for my wireless network, then 2 Airport Express setup to extend the network around the house, an iMac i7 as the main iTunes Library and couple of iPads, and a couple of Apple TVs. Everything has the latest software, but I have several performance issues with Home sharing. I've done several tests making sure nothing is taking additional bandwidth, so here are the list of issues:
1) With nothing else running, trying playing a movie via home sharing in an iPad 2 which is located on my iMac, it stops and I have to keep pressing the play button over and over again. I typically see that the iPad tries to download part of the movie first and then starts playing so that it deals with the bandwidth, but in many cases it doesn't.
2) When trying to play any iTunes content (movies, music, photos, etc) from my Apple TV I can see my computer library, but when I go in on any of the menus, it says there's no content. I have to reboot the Apple TV and then problem fixed. I's just annoying that I have to reboot.
3) When watching a Netflix movie on my iPad and with Airplay I send the sound to some speakers via Airplay through an Airport Express. At time I lose the connection to the speakers.
I've complained about Wifi's instability, but here I tried to keep everything with Apples products to avoid any compatibility issues and stay within N wireless technology, which I understood it was much more stable.
Has anyone some suggestions?

Hi,
you should analyze the db after you have loaded the tables.
Do you use sequences to generate PKs? Do you have a lot of indexex and/or triggers on the tables?
If yes:
make sure your sequence caches (alter sequence s cache 10000)
Drop all unneeded indexes while loading and disable trigger if possible.
How big is your Redo Log Buffer? When loading a large amount of data it may be an option to enlarge this buffer.
Do you have more then one DBWR Process? Writing parallel can speed up things when a checkpoint is needed.
Is it possible using a direct load? Or do you already direct load?
Dim

Performance Issues with large XML (1-1.5MB) files

Hi,
I'm using an XML Schema based Object relational storage for my XML documents which are typically 1-1.5 MB in size and having serious performance issues with XPath Query.
When I do XPath query against an element of SQLType varchar2, I get a good performance. But when I do a similar XPath query against an element of SQLType Collection (Varray of varchar2), I get a very ordinary performance.
I have also created indexes on extract() and analyzed my XMLType table and indexes, but I have no performance gain. Also, I have tried all sorts of storage options available for Collections ie. Varray's, Nested Tables, IOT's, LOB's, Inline, etc... and all these gave me same bad performance.
I even tried creating XMLType views based on XPath queries but the performance didn't improve much.
I guess I'm running out of options and patience as well.;)
I would appreciate any ideas/suggestions, please help.....
Thanks;
Ramakrishna Chinta

Are you having similar symptoms as I am? http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=2234792&tstart=0

Performance issue with XLA tables and GL tables R12

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for