May 4, 2012 3 Comments
I’m interested in what SQL Plan Management features people are actively using.
Read more of this post
Dominic Brooks on Oracle Performance, Tuning, Data Quality & Sensible Design … (Now with added Sets Appeal)
March 5, 2012 1 Comment
Finally, my client’s 11g upgrade is approaching.
It feels like it’s been imminent for ages as we slipped from February 2011 to September then through October to November 2011, February 2012, March 10 2012 and latterly to March 25 2012.
On the whole, these slippages have been more to do with affairs of big, corporate IT rather than any issues with the testing of the application under 11g, for example, red tape, higher priority changes and procurement for the whole 11g development estate.
When we actually go live, I’d be surprised if we don’t see some significant issues and oversights in a relatively short timeframe.
However, before then I just want to go through a quick whirlwind of some of the highlights and challenges undertaken/encountered:
Migration from 126.96.36.199 on Solaris to 188.8.131.52 on Linux via an in situ upgrade to 10g on Solaris as an interim step to faciliate use of datapump as opposed to imp/exp
- Change of hardware.
- Change of OS.
- Change of db version.
- We do not use “incremental change”.
Moving from a 20G sga with 17G buffer cache to a 70G sga and a minimum 25G buffer cache – in reality nearer 60G – using sga_target and db_cache_size.
Not using AMM (memory_target) yet not using hugepages!
Async and concurrent IO.
Moving from a statistics strategy of ‘FOR ALL INDEXED COLUMNS SIZE AUTO’ fixed with the two-monthly release cycle to the default stats job (running in a weekend window).
Removal of a weekend maintenance job that rebuilt lots of indexes for undocumented historical reasons.
No (very limited) use of sql plan baselines.
Trial of cursor_sharing = force for modules with poor shared sql principles, abandonment of trial on 184.108.40.206 due to ORA-07445/ORA-00600 from pro*c code.
Manual tuning of any code that exhibited any performance degradation – plenty of that (not surprising given that the oldest comments in the code date back to 1992).
Bugs/Patches applied initially on 220.127.116.11:
11719151 – crippling sql plan management slowness
9842771 – wrong sreadtim, mreadtim statistics
10269193 – wrong results with outer join and case expression
9877980 – issues with cursor_sharing = force
then because of an XSLT bug (10390389) and because of the number of other bugs listed as fixed
18.104.22.168 (which incorporates patches 11719151 and 9877980 previously applied on top of 22.214.171.124)
October 13, 2011 7 Comments
Here’s a little observation on some slightly odd behaviour with MERGE and some apparent inconsistency of error ORA-30926 (prompted by a question on the otn forums).
If you’re not familar with ORA-30926:
ORA-30926: unable to get a stable set of rows in the source tables
then this is expected with MERGE if the set of SOURCE rows (identified in the USING clause) that you’re merging into the TARGET (i.e. the MERGE INTO <target>) contain duplicate entries for the key columns concerned, i.e. if there are duplicates, which one do you want to be preserved by the MERGE.
SQL> create table a 2 (key number 3 ,val varchar2(1)); Table created. SQL> SQL> create table b 2 (key number 3 ,val varchar2(1)); Table created. SQL> SQL> insert into a values(1,'A'); 1 row created. SQL> SQL> insert into b values(1,1); 1 row created. SQL> SQL> insert into b values(1,2); 1 row created. SQL> SQL> commit; Commit complete. SQL> SQL> select * from a; KEY V ---------- - 1 A SQL> select * from b; KEY V ---------- - 1 1 1 2 SQL>
We might expect ORA-30926 to be raised in this next example, but it’s not:
SQL> select * from a; KEY V ---------- - 1 A SQL> SQL> merge into a 2 using (select b.val 3 , b.key 4 from b) b 5 on (a.key = b.key) 6 when matched then 7 update 8 set a.val = decode(b.val,'1','A','B'); 2 rows merged. SQL> SQL> select * from a; KEY V ---------- - 1 B SQL>
But if we run it again:
SQL> select * from a; KEY V ---------- - 1 B SQL> merge into a 2 using (select b.val 3 , b.key 4 from b) b 5 on (a.key = b.key) 6 when matched then 7 update 8 set a.val = decode(b.val,'1','A','B'); merge into a * ERROR at line 1: ORA-30926: unable to get a stable set of rows in the source tables SQL> rollback; Rollback complete. SQL> select * from a; KEY V ---------- - 1 A SQL>
If we change this slightly by adding and altering an ORDER BY:
SQL> select * from a; KEY V ---------- - 1 A SQL> merge into a 2 using (select b.val 3 , b.key 4 from b 5 order by b.val ASC) b --<----- ORDER BY 6 on (a.key = b.key) 7 when matched then 8 update 9 set a.val = decode(b.val,'1','A','B'); 2 rows merged. SQL> select * from a; KEY V ---------- - 1 B SQL> merge into a 2 using (select b.val 3 , b.key 4 from b 5 order by b.val DESC) b --<----- ORDER BY 6 on (a.key = b.key) 7 when matched then 8 update 9 set a.val = decode(b.val,'1','A','B'); 2 rows merged. SQL> select * from a; KEY V ---------- - 1 A SQL>
Perhaps we get an insight into how the check that results in ORA-30926 is implemented?
It seems to be not as simple as a question of whether there are duplicates in the SOURCE but whether the MERGE would update the same row twice – i.e. an UPDATE that results in an UPDATE not just updating it to the existing value.
The bottom line is that you should never be merging in multiple updates to the same target row.
If there are such incoming data, you have to have logic to filter that down.
May 3, 2011 1 Comment
Just a short note to report on the impact that some config changes have made on IO times in a specific environment for a specific workload.
I mentioned previously that I’m working on an upgrade of an application from 126.96.36.199 to 188.8.131.52
Anyway, anyway, anyway… we’ve been waiting for recommendations and official go-ahead from the database engineering group who run the tests and control the builds of the machines and the following config changes have been made to the following:
Ideally such changes would be made individually to gauge their individual impact, however, as mentioned, it’s not always like that is it?.
And on the UAT environments above, based on a before-flashback-after run of the main application workload, the following IO times were observed:
|Wait Event||Average wait time (before)||Average wait time (after)|
|db file sequential read||10 ms||7 ms|
|db file scattered read||21 ms||11 ms|
|db file parallel read||38 ms||60 ms|
|direct path read||95 ms||64 ms|
|direct path read temp||32 ms||9 ms|
|direct path write temp||34 ms||8 ms|
|log file sync||9 ms||3 ms|
I’m not convinced that we have a level of control over the whole environment and time to deliver change incrementally to read too much into a single before/after comparison of the same workload, however these initial findings were better than I expected.
(Bottom line is that it’s still apples vs oranges)
So… it may be that someone finds this useful.
August 10, 2010 5 Comments
I’m planning for an Oracle upgrade, 9i to 11gR2. Cross-platform – Sun Solaris to Linux. Different Endian.
It’s just under 1TB so not big these days.
Downtime shouldn’t be too much of an issue. It’s not like it needs to be done in an hour or anything demanding like that. As long as it can be done within a day.
Within the client, there’s no official build for 11g on Solaris, so I think that might rule out solutions like an in situ upgrade to 11g on Solaris followed immediately by the move & conversion to Linux.
Imp/Exp seems to be the recommended approach given all of the above.
There are lots of resources out there to help with an upgrade.
So, no shortage of advice and guidance.
But I’m also interested in hearing some real world experiences.
So, if you’ve been through something similar, please let me know.
Tell me how you did it and how it went.