<a href="http://g.adspeed.net/ad.php?do=clk&zid=15220&wd=468&ht=60&pair=as" target="_blank"><img style="border:0px;" src="http://g.adspeed.net/ad.php?do=img&zid=15220&wd=468&ht=60&pair=as" alt="i" width="468" height="60"/></a>
Log in
::
Register
::
Not logged in
Home
Tags
Articles
Editorials
Stairways
Forums
Scripts
Videos
Blogs
QotD
Books
Ask SSC
SQL Jobs
Training
Authors
About us
Contact us
Newsletters
Write for us
<a href="http://g.adspeed.net/ad.php?do=clk&zid=15491&wd=120&ht=300&pair=as" target="_top"><img style="border:0px;" src="http://g.adspeed.net/ad.php?do=img&zid=15491&wd=120&ht=300&pair=as" alt="i" width="120" height="300"/></a>
Recent Posts
Recent Posts
Popular Topics
Popular Topics
Home
Search
Members
Calendar
Who's On
Home
»
Article Discussions
»
Article Discussions by Author
»
Discuss Content Posted by Robert Davis
»
Performance Counters
13 posts, Page 1 of 2
1
2
»»
Performance Counters
Rate Topic
Display Mode
Topic Options
Author
Message
Robert Davis
Robert Davis
Posted Tuesday, September 14, 2010 10:40 PM
SSCommitted
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 2:01 PM
Points: 1,559,
Visits: 1,404
Comments posted to this topic are about the item
Performance Counters
My blog: SQL Soldier
Twitter:
@SQLSoldier
Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server 2008
Sr. Product Consultant and Chief SQL Server Evangelist @ Idera
My book: Pro SQL Server 2008 Mirroring
Post #986020
Stewart "Arturius" Campbell
Stewart "Arturius" Campbell
Posted Tuesday, September 14, 2010 11:34 PM
Hall of Fame
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 3:51 AM
Points: 3,163,
Visits: 4,342
Good question.
____________________________________________
Space, the final frontier? not any more...
All limits henceforth are self-imposed.
“libera tute vulgaris ex”
Post #986032
Hardy21
Hardy21
Posted Wednesday, September 15, 2010 12:10 AM
SSC Eights!
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, May 22, 2013 7:11 AM
Points: 877,
Visits: 1,159
Nice question. Thanks
Thanks
Post #986035
vk-kirov
vk-kirov
Posted Wednesday, September 15, 2010 12:31 AM
Hall of Fame
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Thursday, June 13, 2013 8:50 PM
Points: 3,208,
Visits: 4,178
Good question, but there is a link to BOL/articles/etc missing in the explanation. Should I take the explanation on trust?
Post #986039
free_mascot
free_mascot
Posted Wednesday, September 15, 2010 3:26 AM
SSCommitted
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 3:11 AM
Points: 1,777,
Visits: 1,320
Good Question, Thank you!!!
---------------------------------------------------
"Thare are only 10 types of people in the world:
Those who understand binary, and those who don't."
Post #986116
paul.knibbs
paul.knibbs
Posted Wednesday, September 15, 2010 4:36 AM
Ten Centuries
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 3:04 AM
Points: 1,270,
Visits: 4,306
I had a suspicion that the obvious answer was going to be wrong, but I selected it anyway because I was curious to see what the actual answer was. One wonders why they don't call that value Pages Allocated/sec rather than Page Splits/sec!
Post #986151
daveb87
daveb87
Posted Wednesday, September 15, 2010 7:12 AM
Mr or Mrs. 500
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 11:07 AM
Points: 586,
Visits: 365
More of these types of questions please! Good way to start the day.
Post #986238
Robert Davis
Robert Davis
Posted Wednesday, September 15, 2010 7:16 AM
SSCommitted
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 2:01 PM
Points: 1,559,
Visits: 1,404
It is not documented in BOL. It may be documented in some of the books on SQL Server internals. If so, I don't remember which one(s).
It is easy to prove simply set up a test where you are inserting sequential, ever-increasing data into a table so that there are no page splits, only allocations for new pages, and watch the performance counter.
My blog: SQL Soldier
Twitter:
@SQLSoldier
Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server 2008
Sr. Product Consultant and Chief SQL Server Evangelist @ Idera
My book: Pro SQL Server 2008 Mirroring
Post #986240
Paul White
Paul White
Posted Wednesday, September 15, 2010 10:43 AM
SSChampion
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 2:43 PM
Points: 10,990,
Visits: 10,576
Robert,
I have some (hopefully viewed as constructive) criticisms:
The observed behaviour only applies to clustered tables - heap table inserts never cause page splits. Heap inserts are not counted by the "Access Methods:Page Splits/sec" counter, though they do naturally affect "Access Methods:Pages Allocated/sec".
Minimally-logged operations (even on a clustered table) do not cause "page splits" and so again only affect the 'pages allocated' counter. Taking the example of inserting into a SQL Server 2008 table clustered on a monotonically-increasing key, we observe zero page splits (but very many allocations) if the table is empty to begin with, and trace flag 610 is specified. I chose this example because it is minimally logged even under the FULL recovery model - the same behaviour applies to all other minimally-logged operations.
Adding a new page at the 'end' of the clustered index is indeed a page split: the new row is too large to fit on the last page, so it must split. Not moving any rows from the 'split' page is an optimization for this special case. Nevertheless, it explains why this operation counts as a page split.
The question explanation would have benefited from a reference - even if not officially documented. My recollection is that one of Kalen's internals books contains a reference to new page allocations in a clustered index being counted as a page split, though it does not (from memory) explain why.
The explanation given for the fourth answer option could have been worded more clearly, and again would have benefited from a reference to the internals book that explores that behaviour. QotD is useful to many people as a learning tool - so it makes sense to point them in the right direction if you can.
Paul
Paul White
SQL Server MVP
SQLblog.com
@SQL_Kiwi
Post #986485
Paul White
Paul White
Posted Wednesday, September 15, 2010 10:47 AM
SSChampion
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 2:43 PM
Points: 10,990,
Visits: 10,576
paul.knibbs (9/15/2010)
One wonders why they don't call that value Pages Allocated/sec rather than Page Splits/sec!
Both counters exist, but they measure different things
You may find some of the information and results in the following MSDN Best Practices article useful:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc917672.aspx
Paul White
SQL Server MVP
SQLblog.com
@SQL_Kiwi
Post #986488
« Prev Topic
|
Next Topic »
13 posts, Page 1 of 2
1
2
»»
Permissions
You
cannot
post new topics.
You
cannot
post topic replies.
You
cannot
post new polls.
You
cannot
post replies to polls.
You
cannot
edit your own topics.
You
cannot
delete your own topics.
You
cannot
edit other topics.
You
cannot
delete other topics.
You
cannot
edit your own posts.
You
cannot
edit other posts.
You
cannot
delete your own posts.
You
cannot
delete other posts.
You
cannot
post events.
You
cannot
edit your own events.
You
cannot
edit other events.
You
cannot
delete your own events.
You
cannot
delete other events.
You
cannot
send private messages.
You
cannot
send emails.
You
may
read topics.
You
cannot
rate topics.
You
cannot
vote within polls.
You
cannot
upload attachments.
You
may
download attachments.
You
cannot
post HTML code.
You
cannot
edit HTML code.
You
cannot
post IFCode.
You
cannot
post JavaScript.
You
cannot
post EmotIcons.
You
cannot
post or upload images.
Copyright © 2002-2013 Simple Talk Publishing. All Rights Reserved.
Privacy Policy.
Terms of Use.
Report Abuse.
