Query runs slower in function
Why is it that a query takes more than 15 seconds to run in a function, but only one second when run separately in a query editor window in Toad? Here's the query, where piSiteID, piProtocolID, DrugType1 and DrugType2 are all parameters and v_drug_packs_dispensable is a view that loads almost instantly. I have added all the necessary indexes (or at least I think so).
SELECT MIN(DRUG_EXPIRE_DT) INTO ExpDate
FROM V_DRUG_PACKS_DISPENSABLE dp
WHERE SITE_ID = piSiteID
AND PROTOCOL_ID = piProtocolID
and drug_type_id = DrugType1 or drug_type_id = DrugType2;
If you take this same function and put it in an Editor window and fill in the parameters, it executes immediately.
Toadthat's the answer.... Toad tends to only show the first x rows, try to get the last row in Toad and you'll notice it takes more time (comparable to the function). Toad does a first-rows optimalization.
Similar Messages
-
Query of query - running slower on 64 bit CF than 32 bit CF
Greetings...
I am seeing behavior where pages that use query-of-query run slower on 64-bit Coldfusion 9.01 than on 32-bit Coldfusion 9.01.
My server specs are : dual processer virtual machine, 4 GIG ram, Windows 2008 Datacenter Server r2 64-bit, Coldfusion 9.01. Note that the coldfusion is literally "straight out of the box", and is using all default settings - the only thing I configured in CF is a single datasource.
The script I am using to benchmark this runs a query that returns 20,000 rows with fields id, firstname, lastname, email, city, datecreated. I then loop through all 20,000 records, and for each record, I do a query-of-query (on the same master query) to find any other record where the lastname matches that of the record I'm currently on. Note that I'm only interested in using this process for comparative benchmarking purposes, and I know that the process could be written more efficiently.
Here are my observed execution times for both 64-bit and 32-bit Coldfusion (in seconds) on the same machine.
64 bit CF 9.01: 63,49,52,52,52,48,50,49,54 (avg=52 seconds)
32 bit CF 9.01: 47,45,43,43,45,41,44,42,46 (avg=44 seconds)
It appears from this that 64-bit CF performs worse than 32-bit CF when doing query-of-query operations. Has anyone made similar observations, and is there any way I can tune the environment to improve 64 bit performance?
Thanks for any help you can provide!
By the way, here's the code that is generating these results:
<!--- Allrecs query returns 20000 rows --->
<CFQUERY NAME="ALLRECS" DATASOURCE="MyDsn">
SELECT * FROM MyTBL
</CFQUERY>
<CFLOOP QUERY="ALLRECS">
<CFQUERY NAME="SAMELASTNAME" DBTYPE="QUERY">
SELECT * FROM ALLRECS
WHERE LN=<CFQUERYPARAM VALUE="#ALLRECS.LN#" CFSQLTYPE="CF_SQL_VARCHAR">
AND ID<><CFQUERYPARAM VALUE="#AllRecs.ID#" CFSQLTYPE="CF_SQL_INTEGER">
</CFQUERY>
<CFIF SameLastName.RecordCount GT 20>
#AllRecs.LN#, #AllRecs.FN# : #SameLastName.RecordCount# other records with same lastname<BR>
</CFIF>
</CFLOOP>BoBear2681 wrote:
..follow-up: ..Thanks for the follow-up. I'll be interested to hear the progress (or otherwise, as the case may be).
As an aside. I got sick of trying to deal with Clip because it could only handle very small Clip sizes. AFAIR it was 1 second of 44.1 KHz stereo. From that point, I developed BigClip.
Unfortunately BigClip as it stands is even less able to fulfil your functional requirement than Clip, in that only one BigClip can be playing at a time. Further, it can be blocked by other sound applications (e.g. VLC Media Player, Flash in a web page..) or vice-versa. -
Query runs slower when using variables & faster when using hard coded value
Hi,
My query runs slower when i use variables but it runs faster when i use hard coded values. Why it is behaving like this ?
My query is in cursor definition in a procedure. Procedure runs faster when using hard coded valus and slower when using variables.
Can anybody help me out there?
Thanks in advance.Hi,
Thanks for ur reply.
here is my code with Variables:
Procedure populateCountryTrafficDetails(pWeekStartDate IN Date , pCountry IN d_geography.country_code%TYPE) is
startdate date;
AR_OrgId number(10);
Cursor cTraffic is
Select
l.actual_date, nvl(o.city||o.zipcode,'Undefined') Site,
g.country_code,d.customer_name, d.customer_number,t.contrno bcn,
nvl(r.dest_level3,'Undefined'),
Decode(p.Product_code,'820','821','821','821','801') Product_Code ,
Decode(p.Product_code,'820','Colt Voice Connect','821','Colt Voice Connect','Colt Voice Line') DProduct,
sum(f.duration),
sum(f.debamount_eur)
from d_calendar_date l,
d_geography g,
d_customer d, d_contract t, d_subscriber s,
d_retail_dest r, d_product p,
CPS_ORDER_DETAILS o,
f_retail_revenue f
where
l.date_key = f.call_date_key and
g.geography_key = f.geography_key and
r.dest_key = f.dest_key and
p.product_key = f.product_key and
--c.customer_key = f.customer_key and
d.customer_key = f.customer_key and
t.contract_key = f.contract_key and
s.SUBSCRIBER_KEY = f.SUBSCRIBER_KEY and
o.org_id(+) = AR_OrgId and
g.country_code = pCountry and
l.actual_date >= startdate and
l.actual_date <= (startdate + 90) and
o.cli(+) = s.area_subno and
p.product_code in ('800','801','802','804','820','821')
group by
l.actual_date,
o.city||o.zipcode, g.country_code,d.customer_name, d.customer_number,t.contrno,r.dest_level3, p.product_code;
Type CountryTabType is Table of country_traffic_details.Country%Type index by BINARY_INTEGER;
Type CallDateTabType is Table of country_traffic_details.CALL_DATE%Type index by BINARY_INTEGER;
Type CustomerNameTabType is Table of Country_traffic_details.Customer_name%Type index by BINARY_INTEGER;
Type CustomerNumberTabType is Table of Country_traffic_details.Customer_number%Type index by BINARY_INTEGER;
Type BcnTabType is Table of Country_traffic_details.Bcn%Type index by BINARY_INTEGER;
Type DestinationTypeTabType is Table of Country_traffic_details.DESTINATION_TYPE%Type index by BINARY_INTEGER;
Type ProductCodeTabType is Table of Country_traffic_details.Product_Code%Type index by BINARY_INTEGER;
Type ProductTabType is Table of Country_traffic_details.Product%Type index by BINARY_INTEGER;
Type DurationTabType is Table of Country_traffic_details.Duration%Type index by BINARY_INTEGER;
Type DebamounteurTabType is Table of Country_traffic_details.DEBAMOUNTEUR%Type index by BINARY_INTEGER;
Type SiteTabType is Table of Country_traffic_details.Site%Type index by BINARY_INTEGER;
CountryArr CountryTabType;
CallDateArr CallDateTabType;
Customer_NameArr CustomerNameTabType;
CustomerNumberArr CustomerNumberTabType;
BCNArr BCNTabType;
DESTINATION_TYPEArr DESTINATIONTYPETabType;
PRODUCT_CODEArr PRODUCTCODETabType;
PRODUCTArr PRODUCTTabType;
DurationArr DurationTabType;
DebamounteurArr DebamounteurTabType;
SiteArr SiteTabType;
Begin
startdate := (trunc(pWeekStartDate) + 6) - 90;
Exe_Pos := 1;
Execute Immediate 'Truncate table country_traffic_details';
dropIndexes('country_traffic_details');
Exe_Pos := 2;
/* Set org ID's as per AR */
case (pCountry)
when 'FR' then AR_OrgId := 81;
when 'AT' then AR_OrgId := 125;
when 'CH' then AR_OrgId := 126;
when 'DE' then AR_OrgId := 127;
when 'ES' then AR_OrgId := 123;
when 'IT' then AR_OrgId := 122;
when 'PT' then AR_OrgId := 124;
when 'BE' then AR_OrgId := 132;
when 'IE' then AR_OrgId := 128;
when 'DK' then AR_OrgId := 133;
when 'NL' then AR_OrgId := 129;
when 'SE' then AR_OrgId := 130;
when 'UK' then AR_OrgId := 131;
else raise_application_error (-20003, 'No such Country Code Exists.');
end case;
Exe_Pos := 3;
dbms_output.put_line('3: '||to_char(sysdate, 'HH24:MI:SS'));
populateOrderDetails(AR_OrgId);
dbms_output.put_line('4: '||to_char(sysdate, 'HH24:MI:SS'));
Exe_Pos := 4;
Open cTraffic;
Loop
Exe_Pos := 5;
CallDateArr.delete;
FETCH cTraffic BULK COLLECT
INTO CallDateArr, SiteArr, CountryArr, Customer_NameArr,CustomerNumberArr,
BCNArr,DESTINATION_TYPEArr,PRODUCT_CODEArr, PRODUCTArr, DurationArr, DebamounteurArr LIMIT arraySize;
EXIT WHEN CallDateArr.first IS NULL;
Exe_pos := 6;
FORALL i IN 1..callDateArr.last
insert into country_traffic_details
values(CallDateArr(i), CountryArr(i), Customer_NameArr(i),CustomerNumberArr(i),
BCNArr(i),DESTINATION_TYPEArr(i),PRODUCT_CODEArr(i), PRODUCTArr(i), DurationArr(i),
DebamounteurArr(i), SiteArr(i));
Exe_pos := 7;
dbms_output.put_line('7: '||to_char(sysdate, 'HH24:MI:SS'));
EXIT WHEN ctraffic%NOTFOUND;
END LOOP;
commit;
Exe_Pos := 8;
commit;
dbms_output.put_line('8: '||to_char(sysdate, 'HH24:MI:SS'));
lSql := 'CREATE INDEX COUNTRY_TRAFFIC_DETAILS_CUSTNO ON country_traffic_details (CUSTOMER_NUMBER)';
execDDl(lSql);
lSql := 'CREATE INDEX COUNTRY_TRAFFIC_DETAILS_BCN ON country_traffic_details (BCN)';
execDDl(lSql);
lSql := 'CREATE INDEX COUNTRY_TRAFFIC_DETAILS_PRODCD ON country_traffic_details (PRODUCT_CODE)';
execDDl(lSql);
lSql := 'CREATE INDEX COUNTRY_TRAFFIC_DETAILS_SITE ON country_traffic_details (SITE)';
execDDl(lSql);
lSql := 'CREATE INDEX COUNTRY_TRAFFIC_DETAILS_DESTYP ON country_traffic_details (DESTINATION_TYPE)';
execDDl(lSql);
Exe_Pos:= 9;
dbms_output.put_line('9: '||to_char(sysdate, 'HH24:MI:SS'));
Exception
When Others then
raise_application_error(-20003, 'Error in populateCountryTrafficDetails at Position: '||Exe_Pos||' The Error is '||SQLERRM);
End populateCountryTrafficDetails;
In the above procedure if i substitute the values with hard coded values i.e. AR_orgid = 123 & pcountry = 'Austria' then it runs faster.
Please let me know why it is so ?
Thanks in advance. -
I have a search query that uses the substr function to fetch some records.The query runs fine when executing SQL*PLUS or any other client like PL/SQL Developer. The same query is dead slow in Forms interface.
Can anyone suggest?Both the query use the substr function. Here is the query. only highlighted IF condition evaluates to true.
V_SEARCH VARCHAR2(255);
BEGIN
--- SET MOBILENO
IF :CONTROL.MOBILENO IS NOT NULL AND LENGTH(:CONTROL.MOBILENO) <= 7 THEN
IF :CONTROL.QRY_MOBILENO = 'P' THEN
V_SEARCH := V_SEARCH||' AND substr(MOBILENO,5,7) = '||''''||:CONTROL.MOBILENO||'''';
ELSIF :CONTROL.QRY_MOBILENO = 'S' THEN
V_SEARCH := V_SEARCH||' AND substr(MOBILENO,5,7) LIKE '||''''||:CONTROL.MOBILENO||'%''';
ELSIF :CONTROL.QRY_MOBILENO = 'E' THEN
V_SEARCH := V_SEARCH||' AND substr(MOBILENO,5,7) LIKE '||'''%'||:CONTROL.MOBILENO||'''';
ELSIF :CONTROL.QRY_MOBILENO = 'C' THEN
V_SEARCH := V_SEARCH||' AND substr(MOBILENO,5,7) LIKE '||'''%'||:CONTROL.MOBILENO||'%''';
END IF;
ELSIF :CONTROL.MOBILENO IS NOT NULL AND LENGTH(:CONTROL.MOBILENO) <= 11 THEN
IF :CONTROL.QRY_MOBILENO = 'P' THEN
V_SEARCH := V_SEARCH||' AND MOBILENO = '||''''||:CONTROL.MOBILENO||'''';
ELSIF :CONTROL.QRY_MOBILENO = 'S' THEN
V_SEARCH := V_SEARCH||' AND MOBILENO LIKE '||''''||:CONTROL.MOBILENO||'%''';
ELSIF :CONTROL.QRY_MOBILENO = 'E' THEN
V_SEARCH := V_SEARCH||' AND MOBILENO LIKE '||'''%'||:CONTROL.MOBILENO||'''';
ELSIF :CONTROL.QRY_MOBILENO = 'C' THEN
V_SEARCH := V_SEARCH||' AND MOBILENO LIKE '||'''%'||:CONTROL.MOBILENO||'%''';
END IF;
END IF;
--NDC
IF :CONTROL.NDC IS NOT NULL THEN
V_SEARCH := V_SEARCH||' AND SUBSTR(MOBILENO,1,4) = '||''''||:CONTROL.NDC||'''';
END IF;
--Number Type
IF :CONTROL.number_type IS NOT NULL THEN
V_SEARCH := V_SEARCH||' AND number_type = '||''''||:CONTROL.number_type||'''';
END IF;
--Status
IF :CONTROL.status IS NOT NULL THEN
V_SEARCH := V_SEARCH||' AND status = '||''''||substr(:CONTROL.status,1,1)||'''';
END IF;
--CITY
IF :CONTROL.CITY IS NOT NULL THEN
V_SEARCH := V_SEARCH||' AND LOC_NAME = '||''''||:CONTROL.CITY||'''';
END IF;
--REGION
IF :CONTROL.REGION IS NOT NULL THEN
V_SEARCH := V_SEARCH||' AND COMM_REGION = '||''''||:CONTROL.REGION||'''';
END IF;
--RECYCLE FLAG
IF :CONTROL.RECYCLE_FLAG <> 'A' THEN
V_SEARCH := V_SEARCH||' AND RECYCLE_FLAG = '||''''||:CONTROL.RECYCLE_FLAG||'''';
END IF;
--EXECUTE QUERY
V_SEARCH := SUBSTR(V_SEARCH,5);
GO_BLOCK('NO_INVENTORY');
SET_BLOCK_PROPERTY('NO_INVENTORY',ONETIME_WHERE,V_SEARCH);
EXECUTE_QUERY;
END; -
Below query is running slow is there any other way to write the query which will enhance the performance.
select ld.cst_fle_seq,
tf.date_pro,
lj.case_num ,
ca.reference,
rr.rej_txt
from
load_judg lj,
rej_rea rr ,
pl_case ca,
tp_files tf ,
tp tp
where rr.rej_code(+) = ld.rej_code
and ca.case_num (+)=lj.case_num
and tp.seq =tf.seq
and lj.cred_code(+) =tp.cst_code
and tp.format =9
and valid=''Y''
and tf.fle_name like ''%F%''
and lj.rej_code is not null
and trunc(date_pro)=trunc(sysdate)
Thanks in advance
JhaHere is the explan plan of the query
- SELECT STATEMENT Optimizer=CHOOSE (Cost=16 Card=1 Bytes=225)
-NESTED LOOPS (Cost=16 Card=1 Bytes=225)
-NESTED LOOPS (OUTER) (Cost=15 Card=1 Bytes=192)
- HASH JOIN (Cost=14 Card=1 Bytes=147)
- MERGE JOIN (CARTESIAN) (Cost=9 Card=4 Bytes=432)
-TABLE ACCESS (FULL) OF LOAD_JUDGMENTS (Cost=1 Card=1 Bytes=69)
- SORT (JOIN)
-TABLE ACCESS (FULL) OF TAPE_FILES
-TABLE ACCESS (FULL) OF TAPES (Cost=4 Card=418 Bytes=16302)
-TABLE ACCESS (BY ROWID) OF REJECT_REASONS
-INDEX (UNIQUE SCAN) OF REJ_PK (UNIQUE)
-TABLE ACCESS (BY ROWID) OF CASES
-INDEX (UNIQUE SCAN) OF CASE_PK (UNIQUE)
sorry, as I have checked the tables and its not a cartesian.
Thanks
Jha -
Query running slow after 1000 rows in oracle
Hi.
I have one query which is fetching miln of rows.. the query runs very fast till 1000 to 1500 records after that it run very slow. Can you please help ,what could be the reason?
Thanks831269 wrote:
I have one query which is fetching miln of rows.. Why are you fetching that many rows? What is your client code going to do with a million rows? And why do you expect this to be fast? A million rows worth of I/O has to be done by Oracle (that will likely be mostly from disk and not buffer cache). That million rows has to be copied from the Oracle's SGA to client memory. If your client is PL/SQL code, that will be copied into the PGA. If your client is external, then that copy has to happen across platform boundaries and the network too.
Then your code churns away on processing a million rows... doing what exactly? That "+what+" will need to be done once per row, for a million times. If it takes 10ms per row, that means almost 3h of client processing time.
Fetching that many rows..? Often a design and coding mistake. Always an exception to the rule. Will never be "fast".
And scalability and performance need to be addressed by re-examining the requirements, optimising the design that necessitates fetching that many rows, and using techniques such as parallel processing and thread safe code design. -
Query Running Slow due to nvl.
I have a Cursor Based query written as a Procedure.when i invoke that procedure,I found that two condition statements are the ones which is making my query run very slow.
Since this has been handled with NVL statements query is running very slow.Currently query takes more than one hour to execute.if i comment these two statements and run the query,it takes ony 20 secs to complete.
Those two statements are
'and rbsa.batch_source_id = nvl(p_source_type_id, rbsa.batch_source_id)'
'and rsa.salesrep_id between nvl(p_from_salesrep_id, rsa.salesrep_id) and nvl(p_to_salesrep_id, rsa.salesrep_id)'
Is there any other alternative to replace these two statements by other means.
Thanks in Advance...Dear Friend,
Please try to replace nvl(p_source_type_id, rbsa.batch_source_id) with decode(p_source_type_id,NULL,rbsa.batch_source_id,p_source_type_id)
It will speedup your query.
Regards
Ahamed Rafeeque Cherkala -
SDO_ANYINTERACT query runs slower with numerous iterations
hi all,
I have some PL/SQL code within a loop that take longer and longer to run as it iterates through the loop.
I have identified the problem function below. It seems that the SDO_ANYINTERACT takes longer and longer to execute the more it is called.
I have found a bug on metalink 7003151 with indicates a potential memory leak issue. Could this be a cause? I know that this function runs as expected using Oracle Express. The issue is on a development server which has been patched to 10.2.0.4.
FUNCTION SEARCHFORFEATURE(sTABLE VARCHAR2,gGEOM MDSYS.SDO_GEOMETRY, nSEARCH NUMBER) RETURN VARCHAR2 IS
TYPE typNIMSREF IS TABLE OF VARCHAR2(10);
vNIMSREF TYPNIMSREF;
sSQL VARCHAR2(500);
BEGIN
sSQL := 'SELECT NIMSREF FROM ' || sTABLE || ' S WHERE SDO_ANYINTERACT(S.GEOLOC, :gGEOM) = 'TRUE';
EXECUTE IMMEDIATE sSQL BULK COLLECT INTO vNIMSref USING gGEOM;
IF vNIMSREF.COUNT = 1 THEN
RETURN vNIMSREF(1);
ELSIF vNIMSREF.COUNT > 1 THEN
RETURN '-1';
ELSE
RETURN '-2';
END IF;
EXCEPTION -- exception-handling part starts here
WHEN OTHERS THEN
dbms_output.put_line(SQLERRM);
dbms_output.put_line(sSQL);
END SEARCHFORFEATURE;
Thanks in advance
DanielI have run the query in SQLPLUS. As a single call performance is as expected. I ahve included the XPLAN. I have also tried using SDO_RELATE and SDO_INSIDE but it still slows down after a number if interations. I have looked at bug 7003151 but there are not available patches for a window 32bit OS.
| Id | Operation | Name | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time |
| 0 | SELECT STATEMENT | | 3399 | 331K| 3 (0)| 00:00:01 |
| 1 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID| WATER_NODES | 3399 | 331K| 3 (0)| 00:00:01 |
|* 2 | DOMAIN INDEX | WATER_NODES_SDX | | | | |
Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
2 - access("MDSYS"."SDO_ANYINTERACT"("S"."GEOLOC","MDSYS"."SDO_GEOMETRY"(2003,82086,
NULL,"SDO_ELEM_INFO_ARRAY"(1,1003,4),"SDO_ORDINATE_ARRAY"(123455.9,123456,123456.1,1234
56,123456,123456.1)))='TRUE') -
Spatial query runs slow on view
Hello,
I have two tables and one of them has geometry column. I created view to join those two tables based on id column which has been indexed for both tables.
t1(
id number(9),
name varchar2(20)
t2(
id number(9),
geom MDSYS.SDO_GEOMETRY
CREATE VIEW v1 (
id,
name,
geom
) AS
SELECT /*+ FIRST_ROWS */ t1.id, t1.name, t2.geom
FROM t1,t2
WHERE t1.id = t2.id
When I query the view with following statement it runs very slow (there are more then 1 million rows in t2 table)
SELECT * FROM v1
WHERE mdsys.sdo_filter(geom, [a rectangle],'querytype=window') = 'TRUE';
but
SELECT /*+ FIRST_ROWS */ t1.id, t1.name,t2.geom
FROM t1,t2
WHERE t1.id=t2.id
and mdsys.sdo_filter(geom, [a rectangle],'querytype=window') = 'TRUE';
returns almost instantly. Can some one tell me what is wrong with the "create view" statement?
ThanksThank you for your reply. Here are the plans. The view looks for the spatial index first.
| Id | Operation | Name | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)|
| 0 | SELECT STATEMENT | | 21 | 756 | 10 (60)|
| 1 | NESTED LOOPS | | 21 | 756 | 10 (60)|
| 2 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID| T2 | 5269 | 123K| 3 (0)|
| 3 | DOMAIN INDEX | T2_SDX | | | |
| 4 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID| T1 | | | |
| 5 | INDEX RANGE SCAN | T1_ID_IDX | 1 | | 0 (0)|
| Id | Operation | Name | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)|
| 0 | SELECT STATEMENT | | 21 | 756 | 99 (3)|
| 1 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID | T2 | 1 | 24 | 99 (3)|
| 2 | NESTED LOOPS | | 21 | 756 | 99 (3)|
| 3 | TABLE ACCESS FULL | T1 | 21 | 252 | 2 (0)|
| 4 | BITMAP CONVERSION TO ROWIDS | | | | |
| 5 | BITMAP AND | | | | |
| 6 | BITMAP CONVERSION FROM ROWIDS| | | | |
| 7 | INDEX RANGE SCAN | T2_ID_IDX | 1 | | 2 (0)|
| 8 | BITMAP CONVERSION FROM ROWIDS| | | | |
| 9 | SORT ORDER BY | | | | |
| 10 | DOMAIN INDEX | T2_SDX | 1 | | |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -
Query running slow in one node
Hi All,
We are running 4-node Oracle 10g RAC (linux 64-bit). The query is running fast in one node, but the same query is running very slow in the other node. And sometimes, we see pin S wait on X wait event in top 5 events.
Has anyone faced this kind of situation before ?
Thanks,
KumarHi,
Execute your query on node where query is running very slow. Get SID and execute query above to see what is event of waiting.
exec dbms_application_info.set_client_info('@sw2')
-- file sw2.sql
col event format a25 heading "Wait Event" trunc
col state format a15 heading "Wait State" trunc
col siw format 99999 heading "Waited So|Far (ms)"
col wt format 9999999 heading "Time Waited|(ms)"
select event,
state,
seconds_in_wait siw,
wait_time wt
from v$session_wait
where sid = &sid
order by event;
exec dbms_application_info.set_client_info('@sw1');
-- file sw1.sql
set linesize 30000
set pagesize 200
col sid format 9999 heading "SID"
col username format a10 heading "USERNAME"
col osuser format a20 heading "OSUSER"
col event format a25 heading "Wait Event" trunc
col state format a15 heading "Wait State" trunc
col siw format 99999 heading "Waited So|Far (ms)"
col wt format 9999999 heading "Time Waited|(ms)"
col sw1 format 9999999 heading "File"
col sw2 format 9999999 heading "Block"
col Objeto format a50
select sw.event,
sw.p1,
sw.p2,
sw.p3,
sw.state,
s.sid,
S.osuser,
s.username,
nvl(s.program, s.module),
sw.seconds_in_wait siw,
sw.wait_time wt
from gv$session_wait sw,
gv$session s
WHERE sw.sid = s.sid
and sw.EVENT NOT LIKE 'SQL%'
and username is not NULL
and s.inst_id = sw.inst_id
and sw.event not like 'PX%'
order by 1, 6, 7;Regards,
Levi Pereira -
Sql query runs slower from the application
Hi,
We are using oracle 9ias on AIX box.The jdk version used: 1.3.1 . From the j2ee application when we perfom a search, the sql query takes for ever to return the results. I know that we are waiting on the database because I can see the query working when I look at TOAD.But if i run the same query on the database server itself, it returns the results in less than a sec. Could you guys throw some light on how we could troubleshoot this problem. Thanks.When the results have to travel over the network, it is slow, and when they don't, it is fast.
That is what you are saying, correct?
So your approach should be to not bring so much data over the network. Don't select columns you don't need, and don't select rows you don't need. -
Query running slow after upgrading
Hi,
We have one query that is running very slow in the 10.2.0.4 database after upgrading from 9.2.0.8 HP-UX B11.31. In 9.2.0.8 database it used to take 5 mins. But in the new 10.2.0.4 database it takes around 36 mins.The query is given below.
SELECT a.transaction_date,
a.ORD_PROD_BE_ID,
a.SLS_POSTD_DT_BE_ID,
a.net_trd_amt,
a.trd_actl_un_qty,
t.FISC_MO_CD,
t.FY_CD
FROM fact_net_trd_sls a,
dim_tm_mv t,
dim_prod b,
(SELECT DISTINCT kit_prod_cd FROM kal_kit_bom) c
WHERE b.be_id = a.ORD_PROD_BE_ID
AND b.end_date >SYSDATE
AND t.be_id = a.SLS_POSTD_DT_BE_ID
AND t.end_date > SYSDATE
AND c.kit_prod_cd (+)= b.base_prod_cd
AND t.FY_CD IN (SELECT DISTINCT FY_CD FROM DIM_tm_MV T WHERe T.DAY_STRT_PRD_OF_TM=TRUNC(SYSDATE))
and nvl2(c.kit_prod_cd,'K','FG') = 'FG'
ORDER BY a.ORD_PROD_BE_ID,a.TRANSACTION_DATE;The plan in 9i is below,
PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
| Id | Operation | Name | Rows | Bytes |TempSpc| Cost |
| 0 | SELECT STATEMENT | | 2861K| 1585M| | 170K|
| 1 | VIEW | | 2861K| 1585M| | 170K|
| 2 | SORT UNIQUE | | 2861K| 654M| 1397M| 170K|
|* 3 | FILTER | | | | | |
|* 4 | HASH JOIN OUTER | | | | | |
|* 5 | HASH JOIN | | 1998K| 445M| 4056K| 63419 |
|* 6 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID | DIM_PROD | 53189 | 3428K| | 283 |
| 7 | BITMAP CONVERSION TO ROWIDS | | | | | |
| 8 | BITMAP INDEX FULL SCAN | XN3_DIM_PROD | | | | |
| 9 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID | FACT_NET_TRD_SLS | 4081 | 203K| | 118 |
| 10 | NESTED LOOPS | | 1998K| 320M| | 57607 |
|* 11 | HASH JOIN SEMI | | 490 | 57330 | | 208 |
|* 12 | TABLE ACCESS FULL | DIM_TM_MV | 15180 | 1260K| | 195 |
| 13 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID| DIM_TM_MV | 1 | 32 | | 1 |
|* 14 | INDEX RANGE SCAN | XN4_DIM_TM_MV | 1 | | | 1 |
|* 15 | INDEX RANGE SCAN | FACT_NET_TRD_SLS_IDX3 | 4081 | | | 54 |
| 16 | TABLE ACCESS FULL | KAL_KIT_BOM | 14175 | 85050 | | 24 |
Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
3 - filter(NVL2("KAL_KIT_BOM"."KIT_PROD_CD",'K','FG')='FG')
4 - access("B"."BASE_PROD_CD"=("KAL_KIT_BOM"."KIT_PROD_CD"(+)))
5 - access("B"."BE_ID"="A"."ORD_PROD_BE_ID")
6 - filter("B"."END_DATE">SYSDATE@!)
11 - access("SYS_ALIAS_0000"."FY_CD"="T"."FY_CD")
12 - filter("SYS_ALIAS_0000"."END_DATE">SYSDATE@!)
14 - access("T"."DAY_STRT_PRD_OF_TM"=TRUNC(SYSDATE@!))
15 - access("SYS_ALIAS_0000"."BE_ID"="A"."SLS_POSTD_DT_BE_ID")
Note: cpu costing is off
36 rows selected.The plan in 10g is below.
Operation Object Name Rows Bytes Cost Object Node In/Out PStart PStop
SELECT STATEMENT Optimizer Mode=ALL_ROWS 34 1382
VIEW 34 19 K 1382
SORT UNIQUE 34 7 K 1382
FILTER
HASH JOIN OUTER 34 7 K 1375
MAT_VIEW ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID WHSUSR.DIM_TM_MV 1 81 1
NESTED LOOPS 24 5 K 1350
NESTED LOOPS 740 105 K 1336
MERGE JOIN CARTESIAN 1 95 1332
TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID WHSUSR.DIM_PROD 52 K 3 M 279
BITMAP CONVERSION TO ROWIDS
BITMAP INDEX FULL SCAN WHSUSR.XN3_DIM_PROD
BUFFER SORT 1 30 9223372036 G
SORT UNIQUE 1 30 1
MAT_VIEW ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID WHSUSR.DIM_TM_MV 1 30 1
INDEX RANGE SCAN WHSUSR.XN4_DIM_TM_MV 1 1
TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID TRANSDATA.FACT_NET_TRD_SLS 740 36 K 4
INDEX RANGE SCAN TRANSDATA.FACT_NET_TRD_SLS_IDX2 2 K 1
INDEX RANGE SCAN WHSUSR.XN1_DIM_TM_MV 1 1
TABLE ACCESS FULL EDW_DBA.KAL_KIT_BOM 14 K 83 K 24 We have checked that the statistics are uptodate. Please help with suggestions.
Thanks in advane.Most likely, the index stats are not up-to-date, please double check.
h5. In 9i, FACT_NET_TRD_SLS_IDX3 is used to scan the fact.
Time dimension is used to filter out most records in fact table first, then join to Product dimension.
h5. In 10g, FACT_NET_TRD_SLS_IDX2 is used to scan the fact.
Time dimension "MERGE JOIN CARTESIAN" to Product dimension first to form a data set, and then use it to filter the fact table.
If the stats for FACT_NET_TRD_SLS_IDX2 let ORACLE believe that much less records will remain/survive after the join, 10g will use it.
It seems to me that cartesian join Time x Product is going to generate a much bigger data set than estimated, then the nested loop after that will take a long time to iterate through.
Why don't you partition your fact table BY RANGE(SLS_POSTD_DT_BE_ID) to make it simpler? -
Gl_code_combinations query running slow
Hi All,
I have a simple query
SELECT code_combination_id
FROM gl_code_combinations gcc
WHERE segment1 || '-' || segment2 || '-' || segment3 || '-' ||
segment4 || '-' || segment5 || '-' || segment6 || '-' ||
segment7 = '1G-000-000000-0000-000-1857'-----------------PARAMETER
AND ENABLED_FLAG = 'Y'
AND END_DATE_ACTIVE IS NULL;
As per the DBA this query is running really slow. Is there a way i could increase the performance of this. Using hints or forcing index.
Any help on this will be appreciated.
Thanks & Regards,
RiteshHi,
Query will take less time if you use gl_code_combinations_kfv table which is a replica of gl_code_combination table...
try this :
+SELECT *+
FROM gl_code_combinations_kfv gcc
Where concatenated_segments='1G-000-000000-0000-000-1857'
or padded_concatenated_segments='1G-000-000000-0000-000-1857'
AND ENABLED_FLAG = 'Y'
AND END_DATE_ACTIVE IS NULL;
Your feedback will be hghly appreciated.
Thanks,
S.P DASH -
Hi
i have a query when i run it for the first time it returs result in 30 mins after few mins (say 2 m ins) if i run the same query it fetches result in 3 mins) can any one hel me to tune the issu
when i saw AWR report i showed too many disk I/o and sql messege to client wait events
DB: Oracle 10g
O/S: Unix
DB cahce size :1GB
help PleaePLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
Plan hash value: 3961783764
| Id | Operation | Name | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time |
| 0 | SELECT STATEMENT | | 2 | 390 | 361 (2)| 00:00:05 |
| 1 | SORT GROUP BY | | 2 | 390 | 361 (2)| 00:00:05 |
| 2 | VIEW | | 2 | 390 | 360 (1)| 00:00:05 |
| 3 | UNION-ALL | | | | | |
| 4 | NESTED LOOPS | | 1 | 297 | 344 (1)| 00:00:05 |
|* 5 | HASH JOIN | | 1 | 231 | 343 (1)| 00:00:05 |
| 6 | TABLE ACCESS FULL | TRAN_VH_INV_SS_PART | 3634 | 72680 | 213 (0)| 00:00:03 |
|* 7 | HASH JOIN | | 1799 | 370K| 129 (2)| 00:00:02 |
| 8 | TABLE ACCESS FULL | MAST_MF_NAME | 4 | 84 | 5 (0)| 00:00:01 |
|* 9 | HASH JOIN | | 1799 | 333K| 123 (1)| 00:00:02 |
|* 10 | HASH JOIN | | 1552 | 209K| 120 (1)| 00:00:02 |
|* 11 | TABLE ACCESS FULL | HIST_VH_INV_SS_PART | 1188 | 62964 | 115 (0)| 00:00:02 |
| 12 | NESTED LOOPS | | 24566 | 2039K| 4 (0)| 00:00:01 |
| 13 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID| MAST_YM_YARD | 1 | 29 | 1 (0)| 00:00:01 |
|* 14 | INDEX UNIQUE SCAN | MAST_YM_YARD_01 | 1 | | 0 (0)| 00:00:01 |
| 15 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID| TRAN_VH_INV_SUB_SERVICE | 24566 | 1343K| 3 (0)| 00:00:01 |
|* 16 | INDEX RANGE SCAN | TRAN_VH_INV_SUB_SERVICE_02 | 1 | | 2 (0)| 00:00:01 |
| 17 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID | TRAN_VH_INV | 3863 | 196K| 3 (0)| 00:00:01 |
|* 18 | INDEX RANGE SCAN | TRAN_VH_INV_02 | 1 | | 2 (0)| 00:00:01 |
|* 19 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID | TRAN_VH_INV_WORKSHEET | 1 | 66 | 1 (0)| 00:00:01 |
|* 20 | INDEX UNIQUE SCAN | TRAN_VH_INV_WORKSHEET_01 | 1 | | 0 (0)| 00:00:01 |
| 21 | NESTED LOOPS | | 1 | 297 | 16 (0)| 00:00:01 |
| 22 | NESTED LOOPS | | 1 | 277 | 14 (0)| 00:00:01 |
| 23 | NESTED LOOPS | | 1 | 224 | 10 (0)| 00:00:01 |
| 24 | NESTED LOOPS | | 1 | 203 | 9 (0)| 00:00:01 |
| 25 | NESTED LOOPS | | 1 | 151 | 7 (0)| 00:00:01 |
| 26 | NESTED LOOPS | | 1 | 85 | 5 (0)| 00:00:01 |
| 27 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID| MAST_YM_YARD | 1 | 29 | 1 (0)| 00:00:01 |
|* 28 | INDEX UNIQUE SCAN | MAST_YM_YARD_01 | 1 | | 0 (0)| 00:00:01 |
| 29 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID| TRAN_VH_SHP_SUB_SERVICE | 1 | 56 | 4 (0)| 00:00:01 |
|* 30 | INDEX RANGE SCAN | TRAN_VH_SHP_SUB_SERVICE_02 | 1 | | 3 (0)| 00:00:01 |
|* 31 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID | TRAN_VH_SHP_WORKSHEET | 1 | 66 | 2 (0)| 00:00:01 |
|* 32 | INDEX UNIQUE SCAN | TRAN_VH_SHP_WORKSHEET_01 | 1 | | 1 (0)| 00:00:01 |
|* 33 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID | TRAN_VH_SHP | 1 | 52 | 2 (0)| 00:00:01 |
|* 34 | INDEX UNIQUE SCAN | TRAN_VH_SHP_01 | 1 | | 1 (0)| 00:00:01 |
| 35 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID | MAST_MF_NAME | 1 | 21 | 1 (0)| 00:00:01 |
|* 36 | INDEX UNIQUE SCAN | MAST_MF_NAME_01 | 1 | | 0 (0)| 00:00:01 |
|* 37 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID | HIST_VH_SHP_SS_PART | 1 | 53 | 4 (0)| 00:00:01 |
|* 38 | INDEX RANGE SCAN | HIST_VH_SHP_SS_PART_01 | 5 | | 2 (0)| 00:00:01 |
|* 39 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID | TRAN_VH_SHP_SS_PART | 1 | 20 | 2 (0)| 00:00:01 |
|* 40 | INDEX UNIQUE SCAN | TRAN_VH_SHP_SS_PART_01 | 1 | | 1 (0)| 00:00:01 |
Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
5 - access("C"."SUB_SERVICE_SEQ_NUM"="H"."SUB_SERVICE_SEQ_NUM" AND
"C"."PDI_PART_ORDER_NUM"="H"."PDI_PART_ORDER_NUM" AND
"C"."SUB_SERVICE_PART_SEQ_NUM"="H"."SUB_SERVICE_PART_SEQ_NUM")
7 - access("D"."MFG_CODE"="E"."MFG_CODE")
9 - access("D"."YARD_CODE"="A"."YARD_CODE" AND "D"."VIN_NUM"="B"."VIN_NUM" AND
"B"."TERMINAL_SEQ_NO"="D"."TERMINAL_SEQ_NO" AND "B"."YARD_CODE"="D"."YARD_CODE")
10 - access("B"."SUB_SERVICE_SEQ_NUM"="C"."SUB_SERVICE_SEQ_NUM")
11 - filter("C"."PART_FRANCHISE">=U' ' AND TRUNC(INTERNAL_FUNCTION("C"."ACTUAL_ISSUE_DATE_TIME"))<>TO_DAT
E(' 0001-01-01 00:00:00', 'syyyy-mm-dd hh24:mi:ss') AND
TRUNC(INTERNAL_FUNCTION("C"."ISSUE_DATE_TIME"))<=TO_DATE(' 2010-06-30 00:00:00', 'syyyy-mm-dd hh24:mi:ss')
AND "C"."PART_FRANCHISE"<=U'~')
14 - access("A"."TERMINAL_SEQ_NO"=1 AND "A"."YARD_CODE"=U'1')
16 - access("B"."TERMINAL_SEQ_NO"=1 AND "B"."YARD_CODE"=U'1')
18 - access("D"."TERMINAL_SEQ_NO"=1 AND "D"."YARD_CODE"=U'1')
19 - filter("G"."YARD_CODE"=U'1' AND TRUNC(INTERNAL_FUNCTION("G"."START_DATE_TIME"))<>TO_DATE('
0001-01-01 00:00:00', 'syyyy-mm-dd hh24:mi:ss') AND "G"."TERMINAL_SEQ_NO"=1 AND
(TRUNC(INTERNAL_FUNCTION("G"."START_DATE_TIME"))>=TO_DATE(' 2010-06-01 00:00:00', 'syyyy-mm-dd
hh24:mi:ss') AND TRUNC(INTERNAL_FUNCTION("G"."START_DATE_TIME"))<=TO_DATE(' 2010-06-30 00:00:00',
'syyyy-mm-dd hh24:mi:ss') OR TRUNC(INTERNAL_FUNCTION("G"."START_DATE_TIME"))<TO_DATE(' 2010-06-01
00:00:00', 'syyyy-mm-dd hh24:mi:ss') AND (TRUNC(INTERNAL_FUNCTION("G"."END_DATE_TIME"))>=TO_DATE('
2010-06-30 00:00:00', 'syyyy-mm-dd hh24:mi:ss') OR TRUNC(INTERNAL_FUNCTION("G"."END_DATE_TIME"))>=TO_DATE(
2010-06-01 00:00:00', 'syyyy-mm-dd hh24:mi:ss') AND TRUNC(INTERNAL_FUNCTION("G"."END_DATE_TIME"))<=TO_DAT
E
(' 2010-06-30 00:00:00', 'syyyy-mm-dd hh24:mi:ss') OR
TRUNC(INTERNAL_FUNCTION("G"."END_DATE_TIME"))=TO_DATE(' 0001-01-01 00:00:00', 'syyyy-mm-dd hh24:mi:ss'))
OR TRUNC(INTERNAL_FUNCTION("C"."ISSUE_DATE_TIME"))>=TO_DATE(' 2010-06-01 00:00:00', 'syyyy-mm-dd
hh24:mi:ss') AND TRUNC(INTERNAL_FUNCTION("C"."ISSUE_DATE_TIME"))<=TO_DATE(' 2010-06-30 00:00:00',
'syyyy-mm-dd hh24:mi:ss')) AND "G"."VIN_NUM"="D"."VIN_NUM")
20 - access("G"."WORKSHEET_NUM"="B"."WORKSHEET_NUM")
28 - access("A"."TERMINAL_SEQ_NO"=1 AND "A"."YARD_CODE"=U'1')
30 - access("B"."TERMINAL_SEQ_NO"=1 AND "B"."YARD_CODE"=U'1')
31 - filter("G"."YARD_CODE"=U'1' AND TRUNC(INTERNAL_FUNCTION("G"."START_DATE_TIME"))<>TO_DATE('
0001-01-01 00:00:00', 'syyyy-mm-dd hh24:mi:ss') AND "G"."TERMINAL_SEQ_NO"=1)
32 - access("G"."WORKSHEET_NUM"="B"."WORKSHEET_NUM")
33 - filter("D"."YARD_CODE"=U'1' AND "D"."TERMINAL_SEQ_NO"=1)
34 - access("G"."VIN_NUM"="D"."VIN_NUM")
filter("D"."VIN_NUM"="B"."VIN_NUM")
36 - access("D"."MFG_CODE"="E"."MFG_CODE")
37 - filter("C"."PART_FRANCHISE">=U' ' AND TRUNC(INTERNAL_FUNCTION("C"."ACTUAL_ISSUE_DATE_TIME"))<>TO_DAT
E(' 0001-01-01 00:00:00', 'syyyy-mm-dd hh24:mi:ss') AND
TRUNC(INTERNAL_FUNCTION("C"."ISSUE_DATE_TIME"))<=TO_DATE(' 2010-06-30 00:00:00', 'syyyy-mm-dd hh24:mi:ss')
AND "C"."PART_FRANCHISE"<=U'~' AND (TRUNC(INTERNAL_FUNCTION("G"."START_DATE_TIME"))>=TO_DATE(' 2010-06-01
00:00:00', 'syyyy-mm-dd hh24:mi:ss') AND TRUNC(INTERNAL_FUNCTION("G"."START_DATE_TIME"))<=TO_DATE('
2010-06-30 00:00:00', 'syyyy-mm-dd hh24:mi:ss') OR TRUNC(INTERNAL_FUNCTION("G"."START_DATE_TIME"))<TO_DATE
' 2010-06-01 00:00:00', 'syyyy-mm-dd hh24:mi:ss') AND
(TRUNC(INTERNAL_FUNCTION("G"."END_DATE_TIME"))>=TO_DATE(' 2010-06-30 00:00:00', 'syyyy-mm-dd hh24:mi:ss')
OR TRUNC(INTERNAL_FUNCTION("G"."END_DATE_TIME"))>=TO_DATE(' 2010-06-01 00:00:00', 'syyyy-mm-dd
hh24:mi:ss') AND TRUNC(INTERNAL_FUNCTION("G"."END_DATE_TIME"))<=TO_DATE(' 2010-06-30 00:00:00',
'syyyy-mm-dd hh24:mi:ss') OR TRUNC(INTERNAL_FUNCTION("G"."END_DATE_TIME"))=TO_DATE(' 0001-01-01 00:00:00',
'syyyy-mm-dd hh24:mi:ss')) OR TRUNC(INTERNAL_FUNCTION("C"."ISSUE_DATE_TIME"))>=TO_DATE(' 2010-06-01
00:00:00', 'syyyy-mm-dd hh24:mi:ss') AND TRUNC(INTERNAL_FUNCTION("C"."ISSUE_DATE_TIME"))<=TO_DATE('
2010-06-30 00:00:00', 'syyyy-mm-dd hh24:mi:ss')))
38 - access("B"."SUB_SERVICE_SEQ_NUM"="C"."SUB_SERVICE_SEQ_NUM")
39 - filter("C"."PDI_PART_ORDER_NUM"="H"."PDI_PART_ORDER_NUM")
40 - access("C"."SUB_SERVICE_SEQ_NUM"="H"."SUB_SERVICE_SEQ_NUM" AND
PLAN_TABLE_OUTPUT
"C"."SUB_SERVICE_PART_SEQ_NUM"="H"."SUB_SERVICE_PART_SEQ_NUM")
Note
- SQL profile "SYS_SQLPROF_014aab7522964001" used for this statementEdited by: user629451 on Sep 22, 2010 12:23 AM
Edited by: user629451 on Sep 22, 2010 12:25 AM -
What to check in my query running slow
Hi,
Our 11g database was migrated from one platform to another. A query which ran very quickly before on the source platform now takes ages to run on the target platform. Please could you point me in the right direction as to what things I should check to fix this problem?
thank youHi,
Following are the areas which can be explored. I hope this will help you.
1) Check the Explain plan for both servers. I hope you know how to gahter the explain plan for quries. Its better to use dbms_XPLAIN
-Most probably your explain plan will be different..
2) Check the init parameters of source and target tables
3) check the optimizer parameters of source and target tables. Parameters like optimizer_ind_cost_adj,sort_area_size,hash_area_size,Optimizer_mode,cursor_sharing etc
4) check the data volumn of source and target tables.
5) Check the statistics of source and target tables. Its cumbersome to compare the statistics of source and target. So what you can do is
a) Take the export of statistics of target tables
b) Import those statistics to source tables(Before importing take the backup of source table statistics)
c) Once done the check the explain plan, it should be the same like target database.
-If step 2 confirms that statistics is the problem then you should take the export of source table statistics and import in target to get the same explain plan.
HTH
Maybe you are looking for
-
How can i use JWSDP1.6 from Ant tool to convert .wsdl file into Java class
Hi All, i m very new in the development field.plese help me... i have a .wsdl file and i have to make some modification in the file and return this file with build file used in Ant tool. means my requirement is to conver the .wsdl file into java clas
-
Hi all, What is Web Services and explain RFC to SOAP scenario step by step. Thanks
-
I trying to publish a web page from iweb, but it doesn't recognize my MobileMe account
I trying to publish a web page from iweb, but it doesn't recognize my MobileMe accouI trying to publish a web page from iweb, but it doesn't recognize my MobileMe account, what can I do?
-
Hi All, I pull my ipod shuffle with out doing "Safely Remove Hardware" so now when i connect my ipod shuffle to my USB my computer does read it. it still charge and i ipod shuffle still work and everything, but my computer does not read the ipod so i
-
Error sec_error_bad_der with normal Certificate?
Greetings, friends of Mozilla, We are a Certification authority, but from Mozilla Firefox 37.0.1 we have been having troubles to access pages secured by our ssl web servers certificate. Customers receive the "sec_error_bad_der". we haven´t any troubl