InstantForum.NET v2.9.0SQLServerCentralhttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/notifications@sqlservercentral.comThu, 24 May 2012 14:24:29 GMT20http://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic8243-98-1.aspxI have been scouring the Internet for any information on the networkio wait type. Why? Because, I noticed that I have an issue with it on my database. Thank you IMMENSELY for pointing me in the direction to start fixing this. I've been hounding my DBA for the past 3 weeks about network performance, but I could not prove my case. As a database developer, I can now solve the issue programmatically (which is my preferred method anyway) rather than through the addition of hardware.The effects on my database server during the extended networkio waits -- My 4 CPUs stay pegged near 100% utilization All other processes begin to crawl The cascading performance degradation contributes to many other transaction failures And, of course, my users are unhappy.I plan to write a stored procedure to detect the situation and kill the offending process(es). I'll probably just schedule the procedure to run every 10 minutes or so to prevent runaway clients from taking over the server. When I finish the procedure, which will be soon since I have users to please, I'll post my results here.I'll also spend some time profiling the existing networkio wait times to see what is "normal" on my system. I expect that the networkio wait should be ~much~ less than I'm seeing now. Ultimately, after fixing the offensive client code and implementing my networkio monitoring procedure/job, I will investigate if additional NICs are required to keep up with the traffic.Where did you find this information or did you figure this out on your own? I couldn't even get the wait type definitions from Microsoft; let alone what to do about them. However you got the information -- many, many thanks for valuable information NOT available anywhere else!!! Thu, 15 May 2003 21:48:00 GMTjstein5000http://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic8243-98-1.aspxI will say something .. which I don't know if it will help u or not I think here is the solution of the waitstats Problem (if it is locks on tables)When you want a report which based on complicated queries joined from several tables, These tables are updated frequently, then you lock these tables (or you will wait for previous transaction lock on these tables to be completed to put your locks on them) .. so all other poeple using these tables are locked too (so hang happened - because they are in the queue of lock of these tables)!!the best thing is to run the query on the server (by making Pass-Through Query like in Access) .. and with each table name in the query, add this statement "with (nolock)" .. so you read data as it is (not recently updated = not commited transaction), and you don't wait for locks to be free and you don't lock these tables, and any other transaction will complete successfully (for you and others) :) .you will write something like this in your Query Analayzer and call it from your applicationselect Invoices.*, Situation.*from Situation with (nolock) INNER JOIN Invoices with (nolock) ON Situation.SituationID = Invoices.Situation where Situation.SituationID =1Disadv: - when using "with (nolock)", you will not seen comitted transaction (changed one) at this moment ... but you can see it at any other time.Adv:- no hang at all- very fast Response- Little summary for Locks in SQL Log file.also : you may need to add more Memory (RAM) when server still hangs a little after transfering your queries to path-through queries.... becuase every transaction or query is done on server first, then processed data is passed to your PC. I hope this help you AllbyeAlamir_mohamed@yahoo.comAlamir MohamedMon, 14 Apr 2003 02:29:00 GMTAlamirhttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic8243-98-1.aspxThis must be in BOL IMUO (In My UNHonest Opinion) Sat, 12 Apr 2003 07:24:00 GMTYukashttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic8243-98-1.aspxI'm blown away by the responses to my article, and very much appreciate the comments posted, but does anyone know anything about the waits I didn't talk about. I would very much like to "fill in the gaps" so to speak. What I have is simply what I've garnered over the years, and to date, I have been unsuccessful in ever finding any real documentation on any of the ones not in BOL.Edited by - Scorpion_66 on 11/28/2002 9:44:59 PMSat, 23 Nov 2002 09:06:00 GMTScorpion_66http://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic8243-98-1.aspxBest diagnone i have ever seen. No one can beet this..............Thumbs up............PrakashPrakashThu, 21 Nov 2002 21:59:00 GMTPrakash Hedahttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic8243-98-1.aspxHi allSome things to remember..a) measures physical io, not logical, flush buffers when testingb) force checkpoints when testing writes to force log flushbefore trying it all on prod CheersCk Thu, 21 Nov 2002 19:11:00 GMTckempstehttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic8243-98-1.aspxYes, joachim.verhagen, it is cumulative. The measurement is in milliseconds. The difference between Wait time and Signal Wait time is basically the difference in waiting on something and communicating about waiting on something, to put it in simple terms. Thu, 21 Nov 2002 17:12:00 GMTScorpion_66http://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic8243-98-1.aspxGreat Article and very good insight into tackling the lock waits in a transactional system.Thu, 21 Nov 2002 07:39:00 GMTskasarlahttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic8243-98-1.aspxGood article , nice to have all waittypes described Thu, 21 Nov 2002 06:30:00 GMTKlaas-Janhttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic8243-98-1.aspxGreat article.Can you tell what to do with the resultset of dbcc sqlperf(waitstats)I saw that it is accumulative, so you have to take the up time into account.But what is the unit of measurement and the difference between "wait time" and "signal wait time"? Thu, 21 Nov 2002 04:11:00 GMTjoachim.verhagenhttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic8243-98-1.aspxFantastic article.. thanks for the insight into some of the lower level commands, most appreciated. Thu, 21 Nov 2002 02:56:00 GMTckempstehttp://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic8243-98-1.aspxComments posted to this topic are about the content posted at <A HREF=http://www.sqlservercentral.com/columnists/ckirkwood/wait_types.asp>http://www.sqlservercentral.com/columnists/ckirkwood/wait_types.asp</A>Mon, 18 Nov 2002 00:00:00 GMTScorpion_66