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

counters Expand / Collapse
Author
Message
Posted Saturday, October 25, 2008 6:26 AM
SSC Veteran

SSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC 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
Posted Saturday, October 25, 2008 8:58 AM


SSC-Dedicated

SSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-Dedicated

Group: Administrators
Last Login: Today @ 1:49 PM
Points: 32,768, Visits: 14,929
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
Posted Saturday, October 25, 2008 9:54 AM


SSC-Dedicated

SSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-Dedicated

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 9:48 AM
Points: 35,950, Visits: 30,232
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."

"Change is inevitable. Change for the better is not." -- 04 August 2013
(play on words) "Just because you CAN do something in T-SQL, doesn't mean you SHOULDN'T." --22 Aug 2013

Helpful Links:
How to post code problems
How to post performance problems
Post #591706
Posted Sunday, October 26, 2008 11:29 PM
SSC Veteran

SSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC 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
Posted Monday, October 27, 2008 5:45 AM
SSC Veteran

SSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC Veteran

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Friday, February 11, 2011 8:31 PM
Points: 297, Visits: 277
waiting for the reply.
Post #592019
Posted Monday, October 27, 2008 5:55 AM


SSC-Dedicated

SSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-Dedicated

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 9:48 AM
Points: 35,950, Visits: 30,232
Heh... me too... as previously stated, there's just not enough info to help here.

--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."

"Change is inevitable. Change for the better is not." -- 04 August 2013
(play on words) "Just because you CAN do something in T-SQL, doesn't mean you SHOULDN'T." --22 Aug 2013

Helpful Links:
How to post code problems
How to post performance problems
Post #592027
Posted Monday, October 27, 2008 5:56 AM


SSC-Dedicated

SSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-Dedicated

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 9:48 AM
Points: 35,950, Visits: 30,232
Have you looked in "parameter sniffing" like I suggested above?

--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."

"Change is inevitable. Change for the better is not." -- 04 August 2013
(play on words) "Just because you CAN do something in T-SQL, doesn't mean you SHOULDN'T." --22 Aug 2013

Helpful Links:
How to post code problems
How to post performance problems
Post #592028
Posted Monday, October 27, 2008 6:04 AM
SSC Veteran

SSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC 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 »

Add to briefcase

Permissions Expand / Collapse