Click here to monitor SSC
SQLServerCentral is supported by Red Gate Software Ltd.
 
Log in  ::  Register  ::  Not logged in
 
 
 
        
Home       Members    Calendar    Who's On


Add to briefcase 12»»

PAGEIOLATCH_EX Expand / Collapse
Author
Message
Posted Monday, June 27, 2005 12:33 PM
SSC Journeyman

SSC JourneymanSSC JourneymanSSC JourneymanSSC JourneymanSSC JourneymanSSC JourneymanSSC JourneymanSSC Journeyman

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Monday, November 15, 2010 4:06 PM
Points: 98, Visits: 54

Environment:

  • SQL Server 2000 sp3
  • 8 CPUs
  • Auto Statistics option is ON
  • Simple Recovery Mode

Issue:

  • Running a batch of INSERT statements that has been running for a very long time during development of a migration tool

Some diagnostic

  • SELECT * FROM sysprocesses WHERE spid = 53

spid   kpid   blocked waittype waittime    lastwaittype     waitresource  ecid  
53     2104   0       0x0000   0           PAGEIOLATCH_EX   13:1:6938984    0
53     2828   0       0x0208   16          CXPACKET                                  1
53     2680   0       0x0208   16          CXPACKET                                  2
53     704    0       0x0208   16          CXPACKET                                   3
53     3408   0       0x0208   16          CXPACKET                                  4
53     2792   0       0x0208   16          CXPACKET                                  5
53     912    0       0x0208   16          CXPACKET                                   6
53     616    0       0x0208   16          CXPACKET                                   7
53     760    0       0x0208   16          CXPACKET                                   8 

I am aware that ecid = 0 corresponds to the parent thread.

QUESTION: Does this look OK?

Thanks for your help.




Post #194463
Posted Monday, June 27, 2005 3:29 PM


Ten Centuries

Ten CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen Centuries

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, July 23, 2014 8:16 AM
Points: 1,035, Visits: 410
I can't say that you don't have a problem, but the pageiolatch_ex just means that there is an exclusive latch placed on databaseID 13, fileID 1, and pageID 6938984.  And yes, I would expect to see exclusive latches acquired on a batch insert operation.  If you repeat the select statement and see the same page being locked for several iterations, you have a problem.  Basically latches are locks placed on the data pages as they are read into memory from disk.  This prevents the page from being changed by another process during the IO operation.


/*****************

If most people are not willing to see the difficulty, this is mainly because, consciously or unconsciously, they assume that it will be they who will settle these questions for the others, and because they are convinced of their own capacity to do this. -Friedrich August von Hayek



*****************/
Post #194519
Posted Monday, June 27, 2005 5:50 PM
SSC Journeyman

SSC JourneymanSSC JourneymanSSC JourneymanSSC JourneymanSSC JourneymanSSC JourneymanSSC JourneymanSSC Journeyman

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Monday, November 15, 2010 4:06 PM
Points: 98, Visits: 54

Thank you very much.




Post #194535
Posted Tuesday, June 28, 2005 8:39 AM
SSCrazy

SSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazy

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Monday, June 9, 2014 6:02 AM
Points: 2,674, Visits: 697

the cxpacket is a parallelism wait - you might want to experiment with the maxdop statement to see if using less procs speeds things up.

I see this with poor/complex sql where the cost generates a parallel plan but it actually slows things down.

I've just applied this to a 12 table cross database report - with all procs 18 - 20 secs --- with the maxdop hint  1 sec. ( 8 physical proc box running 16 with HT )

It's not that there is anything drastically wrong with the query - it's just messy < grin > .. sometimes it may be an indication of missing indexes.

 

 

 



The GrumpyOldDBA
www.grumpyolddba.co.uk
http://sqlblogcasts.com/blogs/grumpyolddba/
Post #194738
Posted Tuesday, June 28, 2005 9:08 AM
SSC Journeyman

SSC JourneymanSSC JourneymanSSC JourneymanSSC JourneymanSSC JourneymanSSC JourneymanSSC JourneymanSSC Journeyman

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Monday, November 15, 2010 4:06 PM
Points: 98, Visits: 54

Thank you very much for your input.

This is third party vendor performing a conversion. Looking that the script they are running and the indexing I agree with you that indexing is playing a role here.




Post #194767
Posted Tuesday, April 24, 2007 5:13 AM
Forum Newbie

Forum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum Newbie

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Friday, October 23, 2009 2:24 AM
Points: 2, Visits: 14

I see this from time to time with ARCServe, on a SELECT and DELETE statements. One of the tables has about 91,000,000 records in it. Obviously being a third party application there's no way to re-engineer it and there are indexes where it matters. Tests defragging and reindexing show no effect it still occurs. One of our server engineers insists ARCServe wasn't designed to backup 150 servers.

Post #360492
Posted Wednesday, April 25, 2007 7:27 AM
Valued Member

Valued MemberValued MemberValued MemberValued MemberValued MemberValued MemberValued MemberValued Member

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Tuesday, February 26, 2008 3:06 PM
Points: 53, Visits: 13
I usually associate CXPacket waits with network delays.  The client can't accept the result set fast enough to keep up with the server, so the server waits with the CXPacket wait type.
Post #360832
Posted Wednesday, April 25, 2007 9:04 AM
Forum Newbie

Forum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum Newbie

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Friday, October 23, 2009 2:24 AM
Points: 2, Visits: 14
That would be logical, as the client - the ARCserve server box - is quite old. This seems to come up when a week-night (File server) differential backup over runs into office hours the next day. So the ARCserve box is querying the database on the SQL Server box and receives heavy network IO as the backup to the local tape device continues.
Post #360867
Posted Friday, May 30, 2008 3:12 AM
Forum Newbie

Forum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum Newbie

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Thursday, November 22, 2012 6:09 AM
Points: 5, Visits: 97
I would also look into if you have a clustered index working against your inserts causing splits...

>> Kimberly L. Tripp Posts: n/a
>> Re: PAGEIOLATCH_EX

>> A table with heavy inserts (and splits) and/or a table with
>> updates that's causing splits (is my guess).

Regards Guldmann
Post #508904
Posted Friday, May 30, 2008 3:54 AM


SSC-Forever

SSC-ForeverSSC-ForeverSSC-ForeverSSC-ForeverSSC-ForeverSSC-ForeverSSC-ForeverSSC-ForeverSSC-ForeverSSC-ForeverSSC-ForeverSSC-ForeverSSC-ForeverSSC-ForeverSSC-Forever

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 12:30 PM
Points: 40,154, Visits: 36,541
You did notice that the post you replied to is over a year old?


Gail Shaw
Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server 2008, MVP
SQL In The Wild: Discussions on DB performance with occasional diversions into recoverability

We walk in the dark places no others will enter
We stand on the bridge and no one may pass

Post #508929
« Prev Topic | Next Topic »

Add to briefcase 12»»

Permissions Expand / Collapse