Re: DB time Less Than Elapsed Time - is there a performance problem? or is the report interval incorrect?
- From: Hemant K Chitale <hkchital@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: oracledbawannabe@xxxxxxxxx, Oracle-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2010 23:06:55 +0800
"DB Time" is not "DB CPU Time". "DB Time" is the aggregate of all
time rmonitored and reported. That is why you will find that DB Time
of 8.54minutes === 434seconds * 100/84.72 for Node1.
The AWR doesn't indicate that the Database or any database sessions
were busy or waiting for resources for any noticeable time. If users
had a performance issue it may have been for a very short period OR
in a specific program OR outside the database (e.g. on a busy
AppsServer OR on the network).
Hemant K Chitale
At 06:28 AM Sunday, Oracle Dba Wannabe wrote:
Hi All,
I've been given two awr reports for a 2 node, 11.1.0.7 RAC instance
running on AIX and told to determine what the performance problem is
with the system. Looking through the reports I can't say that I can
see anything wrong with this system - at least based on the awrs I
have been given (a few extracts from the reports given below). What
I have noticed is that for both nodes the db time is considerably
less than the elapsed time of the report - is this enough to deduce
that this system is actually not busy and not performing any sort of work?. T
Hemant K Chitale
http://hemantoracledba.blogspot.com
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Other related posts:
