Same Inserts taking more time in one db versus another

Hi,
We have some scripts that load data...in a new dev db it takes 15 mins but in another db (different env) it takes one hour. I don't have OS level access to the db server but I do have DBA level access . One thing I noted is SGA is 4 gb (in the db where it runs faster ) compared to 800 MB (in the db where it runs slower). Also the PGA is set to 1GB in both db. (PGA is the same for both db).
Is there a way i can analyze the issue? What could be the cause of slowness?
Thanks,
Nirav

Is there a way i can analyze the issue? What could be the cause of slowness?ALTER SESSION SET SQL_TRACE=TRUE;
-- slow INSERT statements here
ALTER SESSION SET SQL_TRACE=FALSE;
now find the trace file within ./udump folder
tkprof <trace_file.trc> trace_results.txt explain=<username>/<password>

Similar Messages

Oracle 11g: Oracle insert/update operation is taking more time.

Hello All,
In Oracle 11g (Windows 2008 32 bit environment) we are facing following issue.
1) We are inserting/updating data on some tables (4-5 tables and we are firing query with very high rate).
2) After sometime (say 15 days with same load) we are feeling that the Oracle operation (insert/update) is taking more time.
Query1: How to find actually oracle is taking more time in insert/updates operation.
Query2: How to rectify the problem.
We are having multithread environment.
Thanks
With Regards
Hemant.

Liron Amitzi wrote:
Hi Nicolas,
Just a short explanation:
If you have a table with 1 column (let's say a number). The table is empty and you have an index on the column.
When you insert a row, the value of the column will be inserted to the index. To insert 1 value to an index with 10 values in it will be fast. It will take longer to insert 1 value to an index with 1 million values in it.
My second example was if I take the same table and let's say I insert 10 rows and delete the previous 10 from the table. I always have 10 rows in the table so the index should be small. But this is not correct. If I insert values 1-10 and then delete 1-10 and insert 11-20, then delete 11-20 and insert 21-30 and so on, because the index is sorted, where 1-10 were stored I'll now have empty spots. Oracle will not fill them up. So the index will become larger and larger as I insert more rows (even though I delete the old ones).
The solution here is simply revuild the index once in a while.
Hope it is clear.
Liron Amitzi
Senior DBA consultant
[www.dbsnaps.com]
[www.orbiumsoftware.com]Hmmm, index space not reused ? Index rebuild once a while ? That was what I understood from your previous post, but nothing is less sure.
This is a misconception of how indexes are working.
I would suggest the reading of the following interasting doc, they are a lot of nice examples (including index space reuse) to understand, and in conclusion :
http://richardfoote.files.wordpress.com/2007/12/index-internals-rebuilding-the-truth.pdf
"+Index Rebuild Summary+
+•*The vast majority of indexes do not require rebuilding*+
+•Oracle B-tree indexes can become “unbalanced” and need to be rebuilt is a myth+
+•*Deleted space in an index is “deadwood” and over time requires the index to be rebuilt is a myth*+
+•If an index reaches “x” number of levels, it becomes inefficient and requires the index to be rebuilt is a myth+
+•If an index has a poor clustering factor, the index needs to be rebuilt is a myth+
+•To improve performance, indexes need to be regularly rebuilt is a myth+"
Good reading,
Nicolas.

XML Publisher(XDODTEXE) in EBS taking more time with the same SQL in TOAD

HI
XML Publisher(XDODTEXE) in EBS taking more time with the same SQL in TOAD.
The sql has 5 union clauses.
It takes 20-30 minutes in TOAD compared to running through Concurrent Program in XML Publisher in EBS taking around 4-5 hours.
The Scalable Flag at report level is turned on with the JVM options set to -Xmx1024m -Xmx1024m in Concurrent Program definition.
Other configurations for Data Template like XSLT, Scalable, Optimization are turned on though didn't bounce the OPP Server for these to take effect as I am not sure whether it is needed.
Thanks in advance for your help.

But the question is that how come it is working in TOAD and takes only 15-20 minutes?
with initialization of session ?
what about sqlplus ?
Do I have to set up the the temp directory for the XML Publisher report to make it faster?
look at
R12: Troubleshooting Known XML Publisher and E-Business Suite (EBS) Integration Issues (Doc ID 1410160.1)
BI Publisher - Troubleshooting Oracle Business Intelligence (XML) Publisher For The Oracle E-Business Suite (Doc ID 364547.1)

Taking More Time while inserting into the table (With foriegn key)

Hi All,
I am facing problem while inserting the values into the master table.
The problem,
Table A -- User Master Table (Reg No, Name, etc)
Table B -- Transaction Table (Foreign key reference with Table A).
While inserting the data's in Table B, i need to insert the reg no also in table B which is mandatory. I followed the logic which is mentioned in the SRDemo.
While inserting we need to query the Table A first to have the values in TableABean.java.
final TableA tableA= (TableA )uow.executeQuery("findUser",TableA .class, regNo);
Then, we need to create the instance for TableB
TableB tableB= (TableB)uow.newInstance(TableB.class);
tableB.setID(bean.getID);
tableA.addTableB(tableB); --- this is for to insert the regNo of TableA in TableB.. This line is executing the query "select * from TableB where RegNo = <tableA.getRegNo>".
This query is taking too much time if values are more in the TableB for that particular registrationNo. Because of this its taking more time to insert into the TableB.
For Ex: TableA -- regNo : 101...having less entry in TableB means...inserting record is taking less than 1 sec
regNo : 102...having more entry in TableB means...inserting record is taking more than 2 sec
Time delay is there for different users when they enter transaction in TableB.
I need to avoid this since in future it will take more time...from 2 sec to 10 sec, if volume of data increases mean.
Please help me to resolve this issue...I am facing it now in production.
Thanks & Regards
VB

Hello,
Looks like you have a 1:M relationship from TableA to TableB, with a 1:1 back pointer from TableB to TableA. If triggering the 1:M relationship is causing you delays that you want to avoid there might be two quick ways I can see:
1) Don't map it. Leave the TableA->TableB 1:M unmapped, and instead just query for relationship when you do need it. This means you do not need to call tableA.addTableB(tableB), and instead only need to call tableB.setTableA(tableA), so that the TableB->TableA relation gets set. Might not be the best option, but it depends on your application's usage. It does allow you to potentially page the TableB results or add other query query performance options when you do need the data though.
2) You are currently using Lazy loading for the TableA->TableB relationship - if it is untriggered, don't bother calling tableA.addTableB(tableB), and instead only need to call tableB.setTableA(tableA). This of course requires using TopLink api to a) verify the collection is an IndirectCollection type, and b) that it is hasn't been triggered. If it has been triggered, you will still need to call tableA.addTableB(tableB), but it won't result in a query. Check out the oracle.toplink.indirection.IndirectContainer class and it's isInstantiated() method. This can cause problems though in highly concurrent environments, as other threads may have triggered the indirection before you commit your transaction, so that the A->B collection is not up to date - this might require refreshing the TableA if so.
Change tracking would probably be the best option to use here, and is described in the EclipseLink wiki:
http://wiki.eclipse.org/Introduction_to_EclipseLink_Transactions_(ELUG)#Attribute_Change_Tracking_Policy
Best Regards,
Chris

Custom Report taking more time to complete Normat

Hi All,
Custom report(Aging Report) in oracle is taking more time to complete Normal.
In one instance, the same report is taking 5 min and the other instance this is taking 40-50 min to complete.
We have enabled the trace and checked the trace file, but all the queries are working fine.
Could you please suggest me regarding this issue.
Thanks in advance!!

TKPROF: Release 10.1.0.5.0 - Production on Tue Jun 5 10:49:32 2012
Copyright (c) 1982, 2005, Oracle. All rights reserved.
Sort options: prsela exeela fchela
count = number of times OCI procedure was executed
cpu = cpu time in seconds executing
elapsed = elapsed time in seconds executing
disk = number of physical reads of buffers from disk
query = number of buffers gotten for consistent read
current = number of buffers gotten in current mode (usually for update)
rows = number of rows processed by the fetch or execute call
Error in CREATE TABLE of EXPLAIN PLAN table: APPS.prof$plan_table
ORA-00922: missing or invalid option
parse error offset: 1049
EXPLAIN PLAN option disabled.
SELECT DISTINCT OU.ORGANIZATION_ID , OU.BUSINESS_GROUP_ID
FROM
HR_OPERATING_UNITS OU WHERE OU.SET_OF_BOOKS_ID =:B1
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 0.00 0.05 11 22 0 3
total 3 0.00 0.05 11 22 0 3
Misses in library cache during parse: 0
Optimizer mode: ALL_ROWS
Parsing user id: 173 (recursive depth: 1)
Rows Row Source Operation
3 HASH UNIQUE (cr=22 pr=11 pw=0 time=52023 us cost=10 size=66 card=1)
3 NESTED LOOPS (cr=22 pr=11 pw=0 time=61722 us)
3 NESTED LOOPS (cr=20 pr=11 pw=0 time=61672 us cost=9 size=66 card=1)
3 NESTED LOOPS (cr=18 pr=11 pw=0 time=61591 us cost=7 size=37 card=1)
3 NESTED LOOPS (cr=16 pr=11 pw=0 time=61531 us cost=7 size=30 card=1)
3 TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID HR_ORGANIZATION_INFORMATION (cr=11 pr=9 pw=0 time=37751 us cost=6 size=22 card=1)
18 INDEX RANGE SCAN HR_ORGANIZATION_INFORMATIO_FK1 (cr=1 pr=1 pw=0 time=17135 us cost=1 size=0 card=18)(object id 43610)
3 TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID HR_ALL_ORGANIZATION_UNITS (cr=5 pr=2 pw=0 time=18820 us cost=1 size=8 card=1)
3 INDEX UNIQUE SCAN HR_ORGANIZATION_UNITS_PK (cr=2 pr=0 pw=0 time=26 us cost=0 size=0 card=1)(object id 43657)
3 INDEX UNIQUE SCAN HR_ALL_ORGANIZATION_UNTS_TL_PK (cr=2 pr=0 pw=0 time=32 us cost=0 size=7 card=1)(object id 44020)
3 INDEX RANGE SCAN HR_ORGANIZATION_INFORMATIO_FK2 (cr=2 pr=0 pw=0 time=52 us cost=1 size=0 card=1)(object id 330960)
3 TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID HR_ORGANIZATION_INFORMATION (cr=2 pr=0 pw=0 time=26 us cost=2 size=29 card=1)
Elapsed times include waiting on following events:
Event waited on Times Max. Wait Total Waited
---------------------------------------- Waited ---------- ------------
db file sequential read 11 0.01 0.05
asynch descriptor resize 2 0.00 0.00
INSERT INTO FND_LOG_MESSAGES ( ECID_ID, ECID_SEQ, CALLSTACK, ERRORSTACK,
MODULE, LOG_LEVEL, MESSAGE_TEXT, SESSION_ID, USER_ID, TIMESTAMP,
LOG_SEQUENCE, ENCODED, NODE, NODE_IP_ADDRESS, PROCESS_ID, JVM_ID, THREAD_ID,
AUDSID, DB_INSTANCE, TRANSACTION_CONTEXT_ID )
VALUES
( SYS_CONTEXT('USERENV', 'ECID_ID'), SYS_CONTEXT('USERENV', 'ECID_SEQ'),
:B16 , :B15 , SUBSTRB(:B14 ,1,255), :B13 , SUBSTRB(:B12 , 1, 4000), :B11 ,
NVL(:B10 , -1), SYSDATE, FND_LOG_MESSAGES_S.NEXTVAL, :B9 , SUBSTRB(:B8 ,1,
60), SUBSTRB(:B7 ,1,30), SUBSTRB(:B6 ,1,120), SUBSTRB(:B5 ,1,120),
SUBSTRB(:B4 ,1,120), :B3 , :B2 , :B1 ) RETURNING LOG_SEQUENCE INTO :O0
call count cpu elapsed disk query current rows
Parse 1 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0
Execute 20 0.00 0.03 4 1 304 20
Fetch 0 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0
total 21 0.00 0.03 4 1 304 20
Misses in library cache during parse: 0
Optimizer mode: ALL_ROWS
Parsing user id: 173 (recursive depth: 1)
Rows Row Source Operation
1 LOAD TABLE CONVENTIONAL (cr=1 pr=4 pw=0 time=36498 us)
1 SEQUENCE FND_LOG_MESSAGES_S (cr=0 pr=0 pw=0 time=24 us)
Elapsed times include waiting on following events:
Event waited on Times Max. Wait Total Waited
---------------------------------------- Waited ---------- ------------
db file sequential read 4 0.01 0.03
SELECT MESSAGE_TEXT, MESSAGE_NUMBER, TYPE, FND_LOG_SEVERITY, CATEGORY,
SEVERITY
FROM
FND_NEW_MESSAGES M, FND_APPLICATION A WHERE :B3 = M.MESSAGE_NAME AND :B2 =
M.LANGUAGE_CODE AND :B1 = A.APPLICATION_SHORT_NAME AND M.APPLICATION_ID =
A.APPLICATION_ID
call count cpu elapsed disk query current rows
Parse 1 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0
Execute 2 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0
Fetch 2 0.00 0.03 4 12 0 2
total 5 0.00 0.03 4 12 0 2
Misses in library cache during parse: 0
Optimizer mode: ALL_ROWS
Parsing user id: 173 (recursive depth: 1)
Rows Row Source Operation
1 NESTED LOOPS (cr=6 pr=2 pw=0 time=15724 us cost=3 size=134 card=1)
1 TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID FND_APPLICATION (cr=2 pr=0 pw=0 time=20 us cost=1 size=9 card=1)
1 INDEX UNIQUE SCAN FND_APPLICATION_U3 (cr=1 pr=0 pw=0 time=9 us cost=0 size=0 card=1)(object id 33993)
1 TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID FND_NEW_MESSAGES (cr=4 pr=2 pw=0 time=15693 us cost=2 size=125 card=1)
1 INDEX UNIQUE SCAN FND_NEW_MESSAGES_PK (cr=3 pr=1 pw=0 time=6386 us cost=1 size=0 card=1)(object id 34367)
Elapsed times include waiting on following events:
Event waited on Times Max. Wait Total Waited
---------------------------------------- Waited ---------- ------------
db file sequential read 4 0.00 0.03
DELETE FROM MO_GLOB_ORG_ACCESS_TMP
call count cpu elapsed disk query current rows
Parse 1 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0
Execute 1 0.00 0.02 3 4 4 1
Fetch 0 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0
total 2 0.00 0.02 3 4 4 1
Misses in library cache during parse: 0
Optimizer mode: ALL_ROWS
Parsing user id: 173 (recursive depth: 1)
Rows Row Source Operation
0 DELETE MO_GLOB_ORG_ACCESS_TMP (cr=4 pr=3 pw=0 time=29161 us)
1 TABLE ACCESS FULL MO_GLOB_ORG_ACCESS_TMP (cr=3 pr=2 pw=0 time=18165 us cost=2 size=13 card=1)
Elapsed times include waiting on following events:
Event waited on Times Max. Wait Total Waited
---------------------------------------- Waited ---------- ------------
db file sequential read 3 0.01 0.02
SET TRANSACTION READ ONLY
call count cpu elapsed disk query current rows
Parse 1 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0
Execute 1 0.00 0.01 0 0 0 0
Fetch 0 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0
total 2 0.00 0.01 0 0 0 0
Misses in library cache during parse: 0
Optimizer mode: ALL_ROWS
Parsing user id: 173
Elapsed times include waiting on following events:
Event waited on Times Max. Wait Total Waited
---------------------------------------- Waited ---------- ------------
SQL*Net message to client 1 0.00 0.00
SQL*Net message from client 1 0.00 0.00
begin Fnd_Concurrent.Init_Request; end;
call count cpu elapsed disk query current rows
Parse 1 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0
Execute 1 0.00 0.00 0 148 0 1
Fetch 0 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0
total 2 0.00 0.00 0 148 0 1
Misses in library cache during parse: 0
Optimizer mode: ALL_ROWS
Parsing user id: 173
Elapsed times include waiting on following events:
Event waited on Times Max. Wait Total Waited
---------------------------------------- Waited ---------- ------------
log file sync 1 0.01 0.01
SQL*Net message to client 1 0.00 0.00
SQL*Net message from client 1 0.00 0.00
declare X0rv BOOLEAN; begin X0rv := FND_INSTALLATION.GET(:APPL_ID,
:DEP_APPL_ID, :STATUS, :INDUSTRY); :X0 := sys.diutil.bool_to_int(X0rv);
end;
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 9 0 1
Fetch 0 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0
total 2 0.00 0.00 0 9 0 1
Misses in library cache during parse: 0
Optimizer mode: ALL_ROWS
Parsing user id: 173
Elapsed times include waiting on following events:
Event waited on Times Max. Wait Total Waited
---------------------------------------- Waited ---------- ------------
SQL*Net message to client 8 0.00 0.00
SQL*Net message from client 8 0.00 0.00
begin fnd_global.bless_next_init('FND_PERMIT_0000');
fnd_global.initialize(:session_id, :user_id, :resp_id, :resp_appl_id,
:security_group_id, :site_id, :login_id, :conc_login_id, :prog_appl_id,
:conc_program_id, :conc_request_id, :conc_priority_request, :form_id,
:form_application_id, :conc_process_id, :conc_queue_id, :queue_appl_id,
:server_id); fnd_profile.put('ORG_ID', :org_id);
fnd_profile.put('MFG_ORGANIZATION_ID', :mfg_org_id);
fnd_profile.put('MFG_CHART_OF_ACCOUNTS_ID', :coa);
fnd_profile.put('APPS_MAINTENANCE_MODE', :amm); end;
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 8 0 1
Fetch 0 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0
total 2 0.00 0.00 0 8 0 1
Misses in library cache during parse: 0
Optimizer mode: ALL_ROWS
Parsing user id: 173
Elapsed times include waiting on following events:
Event waited on Times Max. Wait Total Waited
---------------------------------------- Waited ---------- ------------
SQL*Net message to client 1 0.00 0.00
SQL*Net message from client 1 0.00 0.00
SELECT FPI.STATUS, FPI.INDUSTRY, FPI.PRODUCT_VERSION, FOU.ORACLE_USERNAME,
FPI.TABLESPACE, FPI.INDEX_TABLESPACE, FPI.TEMPORARY_TABLESPACE,
FPI.SIZING_FACTOR
FROM
FND_PRODUCT_INSTALLATIONS FPI, FND_ORACLE_USERID FOU, FND_APPLICATION FA
WHERE FPI.APPLICATION_ID = FA.APPLICATION_ID AND FPI.ORACLE_ID =
FOU.ORACLE_ID AND FA.APPLICATION_SHORT_NAME = :B1
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 2 0.00 0.00 0 7 0 1
total 4 0.00 0.00 0 7 0 1
Misses in library cache during parse: 1
Misses in library cache during execute: 1
Optimizer mode: ALL_ROWS
Parsing user id: 173 (recursive depth: 1)
Rows Row Source Operation
1 NESTED LOOPS (cr=7 pr=0 pw=0 time=89 us)
1 NESTED LOOPS (cr=6 pr=0 pw=0 time=93 us cost=4 size=76 card=1)
1 NESTED LOOPS (cr=5 pr=0 pw=0 time=77 us cost=3 size=67 card=1)
1 TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID FND_APPLICATION (cr=2 pr=0 pw=0 time=19 us cost=1 size=9 card=1)
1 INDEX UNIQUE SCAN FND_APPLICATION_U3 (cr=1 pr=0 pw=0 time=9 us cost=0 size=0 card=1)(object id 33993)
1 TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID FND_PRODUCT_INSTALLATIONS (cr=3 pr=0 pw=0 time=51 us cost=2 size=58 card=1)
1 INDEX RANGE SCAN FND_PRODUCT_INSTALLATIONS_PK (cr=2 pr=0 pw=0 time=27 us cost=1 size=0 card=1)(object id 22583)
1 INDEX UNIQUE SCAN FND_ORACLE_USERID_U1 (cr=1 pr=0 pw=0 time=7 us cost=0 size=0 card=1)(object id 22597)
1 TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID FND_ORACLE_USERID (cr=1 pr=0 pw=0 time=7 us cost=1 size=9 card=1)
SELECT P.PID, P.SPID, AUDSID, PROCESS, SUBSTR(USERENV('LANGUAGE'), INSTR(
USERENV('LANGUAGE'), '.') + 1)
FROM
V$SESSION S, V$PROCESS P WHERE P.ADDR = S.PADDR AND S.AUDSID =
USERENV('SESSIONID')
call count cpu elapsed disk query current rows
Parse 1 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0
Execute 1 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0
Fetch 1 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 1
total 3 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 1
Misses in library cache during parse: 0
Optimizer mode: ALL_ROWS
Parsing user id: 173 (recursive depth: 1)
Rows Row Source Operation
1 NESTED LOOPS (cr=0 pr=0 pw=0 time=1883 us cost=1 size=108 card=2)
1 HASH JOIN (cr=0 pr=0 pw=0 time=1869 us cost=1 size=100 card=2)
1 NESTED LOOPS (cr=0 pr=0 pw=0 time=1059 us cost=0 size=58 card=2)
182 FIXED TABLE FULL X$KSLWT (cr=0 pr=0 pw=0 time=285 us cost=0 size=1288 card=161)
1 FIXED TABLE FIXED INDEX X$KSUSE (ind:1) (cr=0 pr=0 pw=0 time=617 us cost=0 size=21 card=1)
181 FIXED TABLE FULL X$KSUPR (cr=0 pr=0 pw=0 time=187 us cost=0 size=10500 card=500)
1 FIXED TABLE FIXED INDEX X$KSLED (ind:2) (cr=0 pr=0 pw=0 time=4 us cost=0 size=4 card=1)
Elapsed times include waiting on following events:
Event waited on Times Max. Wait Total Waited
---------------------------------------- Waited ---------- ------------
asynch descriptor resize 2 0.00 0.00
OVERALL TOTALS FOR ALL NON-RECURSIVE STATEMENTS
call count cpu elapsed disk query current rows
Parse 6 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0
Execute 6 0.01 0.02 0 165 0 4
Fetch 1 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 1
total 13 0.01 0.02 0 165 0 5
Misses in library cache during parse: 0
Elapsed times include waiting on following events:
Event waited on Times Max. Wait Total Waited
---------------------------------------- Waited ---------- ------------
SQL*Net message to client 37 0.00 0.00
SQL*Net message from client 37 1.21 2.19
log file sync 1 0.01 0.01
OVERALL TOTALS FOR ALL RECURSIVE STATEMENTS
call count cpu elapsed disk query current rows
Parse 49 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0
Execute 89 0.01 0.07 7 38 336 24
Fetch 29 0.00 0.09 15 168 0 27
total 167 0.02 0.16 22 206 336 51
Misses in library cache during parse: 3
Misses in library cache during execute: 1
Elapsed times include waiting on following events:
Event waited on Times Max. Wait Total Waited
---------------------------------------- Waited ---------- ------------
asynch descriptor resize 6 0.00 0.00
db file sequential read 22 0.01 0.14
48 user SQL statements in session.
1 internal SQL statements in session.
49 SQL statements in session.
0 statements EXPLAINed in this session.
Trace file compatibility: 10.01.00
Sort options: prsela exeela fchela
1 session in tracefile.
48 user SQL statements in trace file.
1 internal SQL statements in trace file.
49 SQL statements in trace file.
48 unique SQL statements in trace file.
928 lines in trace file.
1338833753 elapsed seconds in trace file.

Post Goods Issue (VL06O) - taking more time approximate 30 to 45 minutes

Dear Sir,
While doing post goods issue against delivery document system is taking lots of time, this issue is very very urgent can any one resolved or provide suitable solution for solving this issue.
We creates every day approximate 160 sales order / delivery and goods issue against the same by using transaction code VL06O system is taking more time for PGI.
Kindly provide suitable solution for the same.
Regards,
Vijay Sanguri

Hi
See Note 113048 - Collective note on delivery monitor and search notes related with performance.
Do a trace with tcode ST05 (look for help from a basis consultant) and search the bottleneck. Search possible sources of performance problems in userexits, enhancements and so on.
I hope this helps you
Regards
Eduardo

Sql query is taking more time

Hi all,
db:oracle 9i
I am facing below query prob.
prob is that query is taking more time 45 min than earliar (10 sec).
please any one suggest me .....
SQL> SELECT MAX (tdar1.ID) ID, tdar1.request_id, tdar1.lolm_transaction_id,
2 tdar1.transaction_version
3 FROM transaction_data_arc tdar1
4 WHERE tdar1.transaction_name ='O96U '
5 AND tdar1.transaction_type = 'REQUEST'
6 AND tdar1.message_type_code ='PCN'
7 AND NOT EXISTS (
8 SELECT NULL
9 FROM transaction_data_arc tdar2
10 WHERE tdar2.request_id = tdar1.request_id
11 AND tdar2.lolm_transaction_id != tdar1.lolm_transaction_id
12 AND tdar2.ID > tdar1.ID)
13 GROUP BY tdar1.request_id,
14 tdar1.lolm_transaction_id,
15 tdar1.transaction_version;
Execution Plan
0 SELECT STATEMENT Optimizer=CHOOSE (Cost=17 Card=1 Bytes=42)
1 0 SORT (GROUP BY) (Cost=12 Card=1 Bytes=42)
2 1 FILTER
3 2 TABLE ACCESS (BY INDEX ROWID) OF 'TRANSACTION_DATA_ARC
' (Cost=1 Card=1 Bytes=42)
4 3 INDEX (RANGE SCAN) OF 'NK_TDAR_2' (NON-UNIQUE) (Cost
=3 Card=1)
5 2 TABLE ACCESS (BY INDEX ROWID) OF 'TRANSACTION_DATA_ARC
' (Cost=5 Card=918 Bytes=20196)
6 5 INDEX (RANGE SCAN) OF 'NK_TDAR_7' (NON-UNIQUE) (Cost
=8 Card=4760)

prob is that query is taking more time 45 min than earliar (10 sec).Then something must have changed (data growth/stale statistics/...?).
You should post as much details as possible, how and what it is described in the FAQ, see:
*3. How to improve the performance of my query? / My query is running slow*.
When your query takes too long...
How to post a SQL statement tuning request
SQL and PL/SQL FAQ
Also, given your database version, using NOT IN instead of NOT EXISTS might make a difference (but they're not the same).
See: SQL and PL/SQL FAQ

Log applying service is taking more time in phy. Standby

Hi Gurus,
My Database version as follows
Oracle Database 10g Enterprise Edition Release 10.2.0.4.0 - 64bi
PL/SQL Release 10.2.0.4.0 - Production
CORE 10.2.0.4.0 Production
TNS for Linux: Version 10.2.0.4.0 - Production
NLSRTL Version 10.2.0.4.0 - Production
We have datagaurd setup as well - Huge archive logs are generating in our primary database - Archive logs are shipping to standby with no dealy - But applying the archive logs are taking more in our physical standby database - Can you please help me why it was taking more time to apply archivlogs (sync) in standby ? - What could be possible reasons..?
Note : Size of standby redo logs are same as redo log file of primary database - Also standy by redo one or more than online redo log primary.
I also confirmed from network guy for network issue - He said that network is good.
Please let me know if any other information required? - Since i need to report my higer leve stating this is cause for delay in applying archive logs.
Thanks

No we don't have delay option in log_archive_dest
here is alert log
edia Recovery Waiting for thread 1 sequence 42017 (in transit)
Thu Sep 19 09:00:09 2013
Recovery of Online Redo Log: Thread 1 Group 6 Seq 42017 Reading mem 0
Mem# 0: /xyz/u002/oradata/xyz/stb_redo/redo0601.log
Mem# 1: /xyz/u200/oradata/xyz/stb_redo/redo0601.log
Thu Sep 19 09:00:49 2013
RFS[1]: Successfully opened standby log 5: '/xyz/u002/oradata/xyz/stb_redo/redo0501.log'
Thu Sep 19 09:00:54 2013
Primary database is in MAXIMUM PERFORMANCE mode
RFS[2]: Successfully opened standby log 7: '/xyz/u002/oradata/xyz/stb_redo/redo0701.log'
Thu Sep 19 09:00:58 2013
Media Recovery Waiting for thread 1 sequence 42018 (in transit)
Thu Sep 19 09:00:58 2013
Recovery of Online Redo Log: Thread 1 Group 5 Seq 42018 Reading mem 0
Mem# 0: /xyz/u002/oradata/xyz/stb_redo/redo0501.log
Mem# 1: /xyz/u200/oradata/xyz/stb_redo/redo0501.log
Media Recovery Waiting for thread 1 sequence 42019 (in transit)
Thu Sep 19 09:01:08 2013
Recovery of Online Redo Log: Thread 1 Group 7 Seq 42019 Reading mem 0
Mem# 0: /xyz/u002/oradata/xyz/stb_redo/redo0701.log
Mem# 1: /xyz/u200/oradata/xyz/stb_redo/redo0701.log
Thu Sep 19 09:01:08 2013
RFS[1]: Successfully opened standby log 5: '/xyz/u002/oradata/xyz/stb_redo/redo0501.log'
Thu Sep 19 09:01:22 2013
Primary database is in MAXIMUM PERFORMANCE mode
RFS[2]: Successfully opened standby log 6: '/xyz/u002/oradata/xyz/stb_redo/redo0601.log'
Thu Sep 19 09:01:26 2013
RFS[1]: Successfully opened standby log 5: '/xyz/u002/oradata/xyz/stb_redo/redo0501.log'
Thu Sep 19 09:01:26 2013
Media Recovery Log /xyz/u002/oradata/xyz/arch/ARCH1_42020_821334023.LOG
Media Recovery Waiting for thread 1 sequence 42021 (in transit)
Thu Sep 19 09:01:30 2013
Recovery of Online Redo Log: Thread 1 Group 5 Seq 42021 Reading mem 0
Mem# 0: /xyz/u002/oradata/xyz/stb_redo/redo0501.log
Mem# 1: /xyz/u200/oradata/xyz/stb_redo/redo0501.log
Thu Sep 19 09:01:51 2013
Media Recovery Waiting for thread 1 sequence 42022 (in transit)
Thu Sep 19 09:01:51 2013
Recovery of Online Redo Log: Thread 1 Group 6 Seq 42022 Reading mem 0
Mem# 0: /xyz/u002/oradata/xyz/stb_redo/redo0601.log
Mem# 1: /xyz/u200/oradata/xyz/stb_redo/redo0601.log
Thu Sep 19 09:01:57 2013
Primary database is in MAXIMUM PERFORMANCE mode
RFS[2]: Successfully opened standby log 5: '/xyz/u002/oradata/xyz/stb_redo/redo0501.log'
Thu Sep 19 09:02:01 2013
Media Recovery Waiting for thread 1 sequence 42023 (in transit)
Thu Sep 19 09:02:01 2013
Recovery of Online Redo Log: Thread 1 Group 5 Seq 42023 Reading mem 0
Mem# 0: /xyz/u002/oradata/xyz/stb_redo/redo0501.log
Mem# 1: /xyz/u200/oradata/xyz/stb_redo/redo0501.log

Bulk Collect taking more time. Please suggest .

I am working on oracle 11g
I have one normal insert proc
CREATE OR REPLACE PROCEDURE test2
AS
     BEGIN
     INSERT INTO first_table
     (citiversion, financialcollectionid,
     dataitemid, dataitemvalue,
     unittypeid, financialinstanceid,
     VERSION, providerid, user_comment,
     userid, insert_timestamp,
     latestflag, finalflag, filename,
     final_ytdltm_flag, nmflag , partition_key
     SELECT citiversion, financialcollectionid,
     dataitemid, dataitemvalue, unittypeid,
     new_fi, VERSION, providerid,
     user_comment, userid,
     insert_timestamp, latestflag,
     finalflag, filename, '', nmflag,1
     FROM secon_table
     WHERE financialinstanceid = 1
AND changeflag = 'A'
AND processed_flg = 'N';
     END test2;
To impove performance i have normal insert into convert it to bulk collect :
CREATE OR REPLACE PROCEDURE test
AS
BEGIN
     DECLARE
     CURSOR get_cat_fin_collection_data(n_instanceid NUMBER) IS
     SELECT citiversion,
     financialcollectionid,
     dataitemid,
     dataitemvalue,
     unittypeid,
     new_fi,
     VERSION,
     providerid,
     user_comment,
     userid,
     insert_timestamp,
     latestflag,
     finalflag,
     filename,
     nmflag,
               1
     FROM secon_table
     WHERE financialinstanceid = n_instanceid
AND changeflag = 'A'
AND processed_flg = 'N';
     TYPE data_array IS TABLE OF get_cat_fin_collection_data%ROWTYPE;
     l_data data_array;
     BEGIN
     OPEN get_cat_fin_collection_data(1);
     LOOP
     FETCH get_cat_fin_collection_data BULK COLLECT
     INTO l_data limit 100;
     FORALL i IN 1 .. l_data.COUNT
     INSERT INTO first_table VALUES l_data (i);
EXIT WHEN l_data.count =0;
     END LOOP;
     CLOSE get_cat_fin_collection_data;
     END;
     END test;
But bulk collect is taking more time.
below is the timings
SQL> set timing on
SQL> exec test
PL/SQL procedure successfully completed
Executed in 16.703 seconds
SQL> exec test2
PL/SQL procedure successfully completed
Executed in 9.406 seconds
SQL> rollback;
Rollback complete
Executed in 2.75 seconds
SQL> exec test
PL/SQL procedure successfully completed
Executed in 16.266 seconds
SQL> rollback;
Rollback complete
Executed in 2.812 seconds
Normal insert :- 9.4 second
Bulk insert:- 16.266 seconds
I am processing 1 lakh rows.
Can you please tell me the reason why bulk collect is taking more time. ? According to my knowledge it should take less time.
Please suggect do i need to check any parameter?
Please help.
Edited by: 976747 on Feb 4, 2013 1:12 AM

>
Can you please tell me the reason why bulk collect is taking more time. ? According to my knowledge it should take less time.
Please suggect do i need to check any parameter?In that case, your knowledge is flawed.
Pure SQL is almost always faster than PL/SQL.
If your Insert into Select is executing slow, then it is probably because the Select statement is taking long to execute. How many rows are being Selected and Inserted from your query?
You might also consider tuning the Select statement. For more information on Posting a Tuning request, read {message:id=3292438} and post the relevant information.

Essbase Calculation Script taking more time in new environment

Hi Everyone:
We have four environments in our implementation.
1. DEV Environment - 64 bit Essbase Version 11.1.1.3
2. PreProd Environment - 32 bit Essbase Version 9.3.0
3. PreProd Environment - 64 bit Essbase Version 11.1.1.3
In the above mentioned environment PreProd Environment - 64 bit Essbase Version 11.1.1.3 is a newly installed
environment.
We have migrated our Application from PreProd Environment - 32 bit Essbase Version 9.3.0 to PreProd Environment - 64 bit Essbase Version 11.1.1.3. A calculation script that takes only 20 minutes in 32 bit PreProd is taking more than
5 and half hours in newly installed 64 bit PreProd.
We have also migrated our Application from DEV Environment - 64 bit Essbase Version 11.1.1.3 to PreProd Environment - 64 bit Essbase Version 11.1.1.3. The calculation script that takes only 20 minutes in 64 bit Dev is taking more than 5 and half hours in newly installed 64 bit PreProd.
All the server settings and cache setting everything looks similar in all the three environments.
Please advice us what are all the possibilities that creates the issue.
Thanks and Regards,
Prabhakar.

Hi Cameron,
Thanks for your reply.
I have cross checked the Virtual memory in both servers,in new server it was declared high.
Please find the cfg setting which we are using in our application.
AGENTPORT 1423
SERVERPORTBEGIN 32768
SERVERPORTEND 33768
AGENTDESC hypservice_1
;CSSREFRESHLEVEL auto
;SHAREDSERVICESREFRESHINTERVAL 30
CALCCACHEHIGH 199999999
CALCCACHEDEFAULT 150000000
CALCCACHELOW 10000000
CALCLOCKBLOCKDEFAULT 3000
DATAERRORLIMIT 10000
UPDATECALC FALSE
EXCEPTIONLOGOVERWRITE FALSE
CALCREUSEDYNCALCBLOCKS FALSE
PORTUSAGELOGINTERVAL 15
QRYGOVEXECTIME 600
LOGMESSAGELEVEL INFO
CALCPARALLEL 6
MAXLOGINS 100000
AGENTDELAY 100
AGENTTHREADS 30
AGTSVRCONNECTIONS 10
SERVERTHREADS 25
EXPORTTHREADS 1
SSLOGUNKNOWN FALSE
CALCNOTICEDEFAULT 10
NETRETRYCOUNT 3000
NETDELAY 2000
__SM__BUFFERED_IO TRUE
__SM__WAITED_IO TRUE
and aslo find the caches that we define:
Index cache:250000
Data Cache:250000
Data file cache:32768
The all above settings are identical both servers.
In New server ,only one script that is taking more time but remaining scripts are working fine with less time.
We also did one test cause that splitting the script in to multiple and executed ,in this cause the script where we are using direct assigning value from member(say A1) to another member(Say A2) is taking more time.But same scripts we executed in old server it executes fine.
Still we are not able to find out exact root cause for this issue.
Could please anyone help me to resove this issue.
Regards,
Prabhakar.

Taking more time!

hi all,
i am using Forms [32 Bit] Version 6.0.8.24.1 (Production)
i am ultimate task is to read the data from excel and insert into the table. if any duplication of records then stop the process and tell the user that which records are repating..
i have used ole2 package to read data from excel.
i have two pl/sql table for further process.
one table is to inser whatever the data come from excel. 2nd table is to check for the existance of current record with the previously inserted record and 3rd table is do store the duplicated records.
i am inserting each record as it is to the table1. in the table 2 checking for the existance of the record. if current record match with the previous record then store that record into the 3 record.
at the end if the error_table(3rd table) row count is 0 then no duplication then write the 1st table data into the forms and save,else display the table 3(error table) data into the form and say to the user that these records are duplicating.
but its taking more time time.
can anybody tell me the logic which reduces the time consuption(better performance)
Thanks..

hi,
i don't think its a sql issue because if i entered manually(not through the excel upload) its just working fine. the form is database block. so i have not written any sql.
what i am duing is upload data from excel to plsql table check for the duplication if any duplication found display the error_plsql table else display the first table as i mentioned earlier. the 2nd table is to check for the existance of the current record(since i am reading from excel record by record).
Thanks..

Cube content deletion is taking more time than usual.

Hi Experts,
We have a Process chain which ideally should run in every two hours. This chain has a delete data cube content step before the new data is loaded in the cube. This chain is running fine for one instance & the other instance is taking more time so it is quite intermittent.
In the process chain we are also deleting contents from the Dimension tables (in the delete content step). Need your inputs to improve the performance of this step.
Thanks & Regards
Mayank Tyagi.

Hi Mayank ,
You can delete the indexes of the cube before deleting the contents of the cube . The concept is same as of data loading that data loads happens faster when indexes are deleted .
If you are having aggregates over this cube , then that aggregate will be also adjusted .
Kind Regards,
Ashutosh Singh

J2ee engine is taking more time to start

I we r updating from sp9 -sp14
where we have done updtae for java first .when we r doing the same on EP ,ie in final step (start j2ee engine) is taking more time .can some one can help
regrads
harinath

Hi Harinath
It's takes 25 min to 60 min.
during this phase of installation do not start J2ee server manually if possible, if any error occurs check the error log
regards,
kaushal

Whats the reason for taking more time

Hi,
I'm into production support, previously all loadings are fine from the past one month there is a problem in many infopackages taking more time for same no of records, normal wait time is 1 hr, but it is taking 2 to 3 hrs to complete.
Can any body tell the reasons for this and any resolutions will be a graet help for me.
Thanks in advance.
Siddhu

HI,
Try to analyse those cube for which loading is taking more time by RSRV Transaction especially see whether dimension table size is more than 20% of fact table size.
Another reason might be the Table Space Problem or also ask ur basis guys about the Redolog management , ask whether there is enough space while peak loading is going on....
Assign points if helps....
Regards,
VIjay.

ADF application taking more time for first time and less from second time

Hi Experts,
We are using ADF 11.1.1.2.
Our application contains 5 jsp pages, 10 - 12 taskflows, and 50 jsff pages.
For the first time in the day if we use the application it is taking more than 60 sec on some actions.
And from the next time onwords it is taking 5 to 6 sec.
Same thing is happening daily.
Can any one tell me why this application is taking more time for first time and less time from second time.
Regards
Gayaz

Hi,
If you don't restart you WLS every day, then you should read about Tuning Application Module Pools and Connection Pools
http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E15523_01/web.1111/b31974/bcampool.htm#sm0301
And pay attention to the parameter: Maximum Available Size, Minimum Available Size
http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E15523_01/web.1111/b31974/bcampool.htm#sm0314
And adjust them to suit your needs.

Same Inserts taking more time in one db versus another

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for