Re: fetch calls
- From: Alex Fatkulin <afatkulin@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: ca_raj@xxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2012 14:03:07 -0500
It does not look like increasing the fetch size is something you
should be worried about -- you're doing a lot of executions with each
executions returning only a handful of rows according to your data.
Your PIO figures might be a candidate for driving the times up -- do
you happen to have the results from a trace file with wait events
breakdown?
On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 1:54 PM, Antony Raj <ca_raj@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> 99% of the response time spent on the Fetch call.I know changing the
> arraysize from SQL*PLUS would reduce the number of fetch calls.
> But this sql is generated from a third-party application's application server
> on which the maximum fetch size configured as unlimited.
> Is there any other ways to reduce the number of fetch calls?
>
>
> Rows Operation
> 1 TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID ODSTEST (cr pr=3 pw=0 time 036 us cost=9
> size#5 card=1)
> 1 INDEX RANGE SCAN ODSTESTIDX (cr pr=3 pw=0 time 991 us cost=8 size=0
> card=1) (object id 684849)
> Database Call Statistics
> Call Count Misses CPU [s] Elapsed [s] PIO [b] LIO [b] Consistent [b]
> Current [b] Rows
> Parse 36,826 1 0.140 1.390 0 0 0 0 0
> Execute 36,826 1 2.130 10.326 0 2 2 0 0
> Fetch 36,826 0 42.890 802.626 123,585 390,806 390,806 0 43,918
> Total 110,478 2 45.160 814.342 123,585 390,808 390,808 0 43,918
> Average (per execution) 3 0 0.001 0.022 3 10 10 0 1
> Average (per row) 2 0 0.001 0.019 2 8 8 0 1
>
> Thanks
> --
> //www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
>
>
--
Alex Fatkulin,
http://afatkulin.blogspot.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/alexfatkulin
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Other related posts:
