why does a sql server query take too long in stress test - sql-server-2000

Sql server query takes 1 second when run in query analyzer with single user. I started stress tool written by Adam Machanic with same query and run that for 200 users and in parrallel I ran the same query in query analyzer it takes more than when 20 second.
How to find which join or where clause is creating problem in a stress test situation. What is taking so long?
Thanks,
Ron

It's likely going to be locking and blocking. A starting point is reading this article on the MSDN that gives a sproc you can run (and the output of which is very verbose). Indexes may be one way to sort it out, but without any more information (schema, query, volumes of data, etc) it's unlikely we can provide more.

see this article: Slow in the Application, Fast in SSMS? Understanding Performance Mysteries by Erland Sommarskog, it is the most comprehensive article that I've ever seen on this issue.
I'd bet that it is one of The Default Settings, like QUOTED_IDENTIFIER.

Related

DB2 query is consuming long time how do i solve it

If in an interview I am asked As a DB2 DBA how would you approach a job or a query which is consuming more time than normal? Which commands would you use and what all steps would you take to resolve it?
If it is a job I would use db2mon.sh as a starting point, if it is a query I would first try db2advis to see if it recommends any indexes.
The Db2 Knowledge Center has a section on "Troubleshooting" which includes Troubleshooting Db2 Servers and there is a section on Troubleshooting SQL Performance which mentions db2mon.
There is also a section on Performance Tuning. As a DBA, it is worth reading all these sections (at least once anyway).

Stored procedure runs slow on the first run

I have a job that runs daily and executes dozens of stored procedures.
Most of them run just fine, but several of them recently started taking a while to run (4-5 minutes).
When I come in in the morning and try to troubleshoot them, they only take 10-20 seconds, just as they supposed to.
This has been happening for the last 10 days or so. No changes had been made to the server (we are running SQL 2012).
How do I even troubleshoot it and what can I do to fix this??
Thanks!!
You can use some DMVs (Dynamic Management Views) that SQL provides to investigate the plan cache. However, the results can be a little intimidating and without some background in it, it may be hard to dig through the results. I would recommend looking into some DMVs like sys.dm_exec_query_stats and sys.dm_exec_cached_plans. Kimberly Tripp from SQLSkills.com does some GREAT courses on Pluralsight on how to use these and get some awesome results by building more advanced queries off of those DMVs.
As well, these DMVs will return a plan_handle column which you can pass to another DMV, sys.dm_exec_query_plan(plan_handle), to return the Execution Plan for a specific statement. The hard part is going to be digging through the results of dm_exec_cached_plans to find the specific job/stored procs that are causing issues. sys.dm_exec_sql_text(qs.[sql_handle]) can help by providing a snapshot of the SQL that was run for that job but you'll get the most benefit out of it (in my opinion) by CROSS APPLYing it with some of the other DMVs I mentioned. If you can identify the Job/Proc/Statement and look at the plan, it will likely show you some indication of the parameter sniffing problem that Sean Lange mentioned.
Just in case: parameter sniffing is when you run the first instance of a query/stored proc, SQL looks at the parameter that you passed in and builds a plan based off of it. The plan that gets generated from that initial compilation of the query/proc will be ideal for the specific parameter that you passed in but might not be ideal for other parameters. Imagine a highly skewed table where all of the dates are '01-01-2000', except one which is '10-10-2015'.
Passing those two parameters in would generate vastly different plans due to data selectivity (read: how unique is the data?). If one of those plans gets saved to cache and called for each subsequent execution, it's possible (and in some cases, likely) that it's not going to be ideal for other parameters.
The likely reason why you're seeing a difference in speed between the Job and when you run the command yourself, is that when you run it, you're running it Ad Hoc. The Job isn't, it's running them as Stored Procs, which means they're going to use different execution plans.
TL;DR:
The Execution Plan that you have saved for the Job is not optimized. However, when you run it manually, you're likely creating an Ad Hoc plan that is optimized for that SPECIFIC run. It's a bit of a hard road to dig into the plan cache and see what's going on but it's 100% worth it. I highly recommend looking up Kimberly Tripp's blog as she has some great posts about this and also some fantastic courses on Pluralsight regarding this.

Analysing/Profiling queries on PostgreSQL

I've just inherited an old PostgreSQL installation and need to do some diagnostics to find out why this database is running slow. On MS SQL you would use a tool such as Profiler to see what queries are running and then see how their execution plan looks like.
What tools, if any, exist for PostgreSQL that I can do this with? I would appreciate any help since I´m quite new with Postgres.
Use pg_stat_statements extension to get long running queries. then use select* from pg_stat_statements order by total_time/calls desc limit 10 to get ten longest. then use explain to see the plan...
My general approach is usually a mixture of approaches. This requires no extensions.
set the log_min_duration_statement to catch long-running queries. https://dba.stackexchange.com/questions/62842/log-min-duration-statement-setting-is-ignored should get you started.
Use profiling of client applications to see which queries they are spending their time on. Sometimes one has queries which take a small duration but are so frequently repeated to cause performance problems.
Of course then explain analyze can help. If you are looking inside plpgsql functions however, often you need to pull out the queries and run explain analyze on them directly.
Note: ALWAYS run explain analyze in a transaction that rolls back or a read-only transaction unless you know that it does not write to the database.

SQL Queries - Where to find more optimization tidbits like a=b AND b=c slower than a=b AND b=c AND a=c?

I was just wondering where I could find more information on these optimizations? Google searches tend to emphasize prepared queries and such, and not really at the angle of the abstraction the SQL provides.
Source:
http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/LeakyAbstractions.html
The SQL language is meant to abstract
away the procedural steps that are
needed to query a database, instead
allowing you to define merely what you
want and let the database figure out
the procedural steps to query it. But
in some cases, certain SQL queries are
thousands of times slower than other
logically equivalent queries. A famous
example of this is that some SQL
servers are dramatically faster if you
specify "where a=b and b=c and a=c"
than if you only specify "where a=b
and b=c" even though the result set is
the same. You're not supposed to have
to care about the procedure, only the
specification. But sometimes the
abstraction leaks and causes horrible
performance and you have to break out
the query plan analyzer and study what
it did wrong, and figure out how to
make your query run faster.
Looking at MySql in particular.
You can try SQL Server Performance, although I think it's geared towards MS SQL Server more than other RDBMSs. Personally, I look at performance tuning as a process more than a collection of tidbits.
Once you get the process down you're likely to come across single item optimizations as you go, but it's the process itself that will give you the most bang for your buck. Learn how to read query plans (or the equivalent in your RDBMS), learn the insides/behind the scenes implementation of your server, how it stores and uses indexes, how to find bottlenecks in IO, memory, locking, etc.
Books are better than web searches to learn performance tuning for a database. It is a complex subject and varies greatly from datbase to database and even as #OMGPonies said from version to version.
Only My SQL Performance book I found at amazon, don;t know how good it is:
http://www.amazon.com/High-Performance-MySQL-Optimization-Replication/dp/0596101716/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1277756707&sr=8-1
"these" are not optimizations.
Learn profiling - the source of all optimizations.
That's all you need.
One you mentioned is not "optimization tidbit". It was an example of totally different subject.
And it is not supposed for blind usage.
But only as a result of profiling, if applicable.
The whole your approach is wrong. There are no "optimization tidbits". There are only profiling. Once you find your "where a=b and b=c" query runs slow - you can start looking for the solution, not sooner.
So, you have 2 instruments to use:
BENCHMARK your query goes here
and
EXPLAIN your query goes here
study their output and then ask particular questions, regarding your server, your settings, your database. That's the only way. No "canned recipe" could help.
As for just a curious reading, you can follow blog, named surprisingly http://mysqlperformanceblog.com

At some point in your career with SQL Server does parameter sniffing just jump out and attack?

Today again, I have a MAJOR issue with what appears to be parameter sniffing in SQL Server 2005.
I have a query comparing some results with known good results. I added a column to the results and the known good results, so that each month, I can load a new months results in both sides and compare only the current month. The new column is first in the clustered index, so new months will add to the end.
I add a criteria to my WHERE clause - this is code-generated, so it's a literal constant:
WHERE DATA_DT_ID = 20081231 -- Which is redundant because all DATA_DT_ID are 20081231 right now.
Performance goes to pot. From 7 seconds to compare about 1.5m rows to 2 hours and nothing completing. Running the generated SQL right in SSMS - no SPs.
I've been using SQL Server for going on 12 years now and I have never had so many problems with parameter sniffing as I have had on this production server since October (build build 9.00.3068.00). And in every case, it's not because it was run the first time with a different parameter or the table changed. This is a new table and it's only run with this parameter or no WHERE clause at all.
And, no, I don't have DBA access, and they haven't given me enough rights to see the execution plans.
It's to the point where I'm not sure I'm going to be able to handle this system off to SQL Server users with only a couple years experience.
UPDATE Turns out that although statistics claim to be up to date, running UPDATE STATISTICS WITH FULLSCAN clears up the problem.
FINAL UPDATE Even with recreating the SP, using WITH RECOMPILE and UPDATE STATISTICS, it turned out the query had to be rewritten in a different way to use a NOT IN instead of a LEFT JOIN with NULL check.
Not quite an answer, but I'll share my experience.
Parameter sniffing took a few years of SQL Server to come and bite me, when I went back to Developer DBA after moving away to mostly prod DBA work. I understood more about the engine, how SQL works, what was best left to the client etc and I was a better SQL coder.
For example, dynamic SQL or CURSORs or just plain bad SQL code probably won't ever suffer parameter sniffing. But better set programming or how to avoid dynamic SQL or more elegant SQL more likely will.
I noticed it for complex search code (plenty of conditionals) and complex reports where parameter defaults affected the plan. When I see how less experienced developers would write this code, then it won't suffer parameter sniffing.
In any event, I prefer parameter masking to WITH RECOMPILE. Updating stats or indexes forces a recompile anyway. But why recompile all the time? I've answered elsewhere to one of your questions with a link that mentions parameters are sniffed during compilation, so I don't have faith in it either.
Parameter masking is an overhead, yes, but it allows the optimiser to evaluate the query case by case, rather than blanket recompiling. Especially with statement level recompilation of SQL Server 2005
OPTIMISE FOR UNKNOWN in SQL Server 2008 also appears to do exactly the same thing as masking. My SQL Server MVP colleague and I spent some time investigating and came to this conclusion.
I suspect your problem is caused by out of data statistics. Since you do not have DBA access to the server, I would encourage you to ask the DBA when the last time statistics were updated. This can have a huge impact on performance. It also sounds like your tables are not indexed very well.
Basically, this does not "feel" like a parameter sniffing issue, but more of a "healthy" database issue.
This article describes how you can determine the last time statistics were updated:
Statistics Update Time
I second the comment about checking the statistics - I have seen several instances where a query's performance has fallen off a cliff specifically because the statistics are out of date.
Specifically, if you have a date in your PK, and SQL Server thinks there are only a 10 or 100 records which after a specific date when in fact there are thousands, it may choose terribly inefficient query plans because it thinks the dataset is much smaller than it really is.
HTH,
Andrew
I had a production issue exactly like this. A tab in the application which called a stored proc would not show. I ran a trace for the specific proc and saw the call. The application times out in 30 secs and the proc would take close to 40 - 50 secs to complete (ran the proc exactly as called from the trace).
Next step was to figure out which statement was causing the scans I notice in the execution of the procedure. So I scripted out the proc, removed the procedure syntax and declared variables and ran in query analyser. It RAN in 3 secs!!!
I'm writing this to let anyone out there looking for answeres know that this can happen in SQL. It stems from the parameter sniffing issue. I was able t ofind this thread because I pin-pointed the cause as a faulty cached query plan! I've read posts where they said it happens to one specific users/ value. But it can happen to any value and once it starts, it can be a continuous thing.
The solution for me was to script out the proc and run it again. yeah. that simple. An alter works fine. No need to drop and re-create. This causes SQL to refresh the cached plan and things were fine. I have not figured out how to disable this at a server level. It is too cumbersome to clean up all the procs. Hope this helps