counters

SQLServerCentral is supported by Red Gate Software Ltd.

Popular Topics

Home

Members

Calendar

Who's On

Home » SQL Server 2005 » Administering » counters

counters

Rate Topic

Display Mode

Topic Options

Author

Message

saby

Posted Saturday, October 25, 2008 6:26 AM

SSC Veteran

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Friday, February 11, 2011 8:31 PM
Points: 297, Visits: 277

hi all m having an issue ...
we are having a server contains 28 gb ram ... 20 gb given to sqlserver ,x64 enterprise ,windows 2003
database size 5 GB
we are having an application which goes 100 stages ....
all the stages are same which runs a proc ...
for every 1 stage took 5 mins after 35 stages the time increased and after 70 stages it is taking 35 mins wen i 1st checked the counters

total target memory and Target server Memory wer same and
then after stage 35 total target memory was less then Target server Memory

disk IO is not increasing as it was increasing cpu utilization is normal 14 %
buffer cache hit ratio is 99.20 and cache hit ratio is avg 55 % for 35 the stages after 35 it increased to more than 70 %.
wen using who2 active it shows cpu 463781 disk IO 406
Please provide me the solution i m not getin what exactly the reason is...

Post #591685

Steve Jones - SSC Editor

Posted Saturday, October 25, 2008 8:58 AM

SSC-Dedicated

Group: Administrators
Last Login: Today @ 11:20 AM
Points: 31,437, Visits: 13,752

It's hard to get you something to do because there isn't enough information here. The low cahce hit ratio makes me wonder if your data is significantly diverse that you can't cache enough. If you watch the execution plans for the states, are they all the same? What is the difference in the stages?

Follow me on Twitter: @way0utwest

Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help

Post #591699

Jeff Moden

Posted Saturday, October 25, 2008 9:54 AM

SSC-Dedicated

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 3:06 PM
Points: 32,930, Visits: 26,816

It sounds like you're passing each stage as a parameter and that you're looping through each stage. It sounds like each stage may be different enough where you are actually experiencing a phenomenon known as "parameter sniffing" whereby the previous set of parameters setup a particular execution plan that is no good for the current parameter.

It's too long to list here... search for "parameter sniff" on the web for more info.

--Jeff Moden

"RBAR is pronounced "ree-bar" and is a "Modenism" for "Row-By-Agonizing-Row".

First step towards the paradigm shift of writing Set Based code:
Stop thinking about what you want to do to a row... think, instead, of what you want to do to a column."

For better, quicker answers on T-SQL questions, click on the following...
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/Best+Practices/61537/

For better answers on performance questions, click on the following...
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/SQLServerCentral/66909/

Post #591706

saby

Posted Sunday, October 26, 2008 11:29 PM

SSC Veteran

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Friday, February 11, 2011 8:31 PM
Points: 297, Visits: 277

the only difference in the stages is stage 1 wil calulate for stage 1 and after the 1st stage gets fully completed it will go to the next stage and soo on .....

but i dnt no y disk IO is not increasing so much after 35 stages and cache hit ratio is dam low ...

may i know wat can be the reason for cache hit ratio

Post #591915

saby

Posted Monday, October 27, 2008 5:45 AM

SSC Veteran

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Friday, February 11, 2011 8:31 PM
Points: 297, Visits: 277

waiting for the reply.

Post #592019

Jeff Moden

Posted Monday, October 27, 2008 5:55 AM

SSC-Dedicated

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 3:06 PM
Points: 32,930, Visits: 26,816

Heh... me too... as previously stated, there's just not enough info to help here.

--Jeff Moden

Post #592027

Jeff Moden

Posted Monday, October 27, 2008 5:56 AM

SSC-Dedicated

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 3:06 PM
Points: 32,930, Visits: 26,816

Have you looked in "parameter sniffing" like I suggested above?

--Jeff Moden

Post #592028

saby

Posted Monday, October 27, 2008 6:04 AM

SSC Veteran

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Friday, February 11, 2011 8:31 PM
Points: 297, Visits: 277

jeff the prob is even if i m running on 1 stage at a time my IO is slowly increasing and cache hit ratio is below 60 % there where some query which wer using doing table scan that has been sorted on...

Post #592033

« Prev Topic | Next Topic »

Permissions