Ian, Consider that most systems will have: - jobs that run frequently - jobs that run infrequently, or only once and never again These jobs will either perform poorly or perform acceptably well. Jobs will have a relative level of criticality to the system, as defined = by your business rules and user community. Unless a job is "critical", and executes "frequently" and is performing = "poorly" (all in quotes, because it's up to you to decide how to determine that), I would contend that it's = not worth chasing. If you agree w/ that, then there should be an opportunity to get a 10046 = level-8 trace soon, since the job executes "frequently". If you don't agree w/ the above, then I'd like to = understand why. -Mark -----Original Message----- From: MacGregor, Ian A. [mailto:ian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Sent: Monday, February 02, 2004 3:58 PM To: 'oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx' Subject: RE: Capacity Planner from OEM VS Statspack What do you do when someone calls to say, "My job which usually takes 20 = minutes to run took over 2 hours last night?" Do you inquire about the = composition of the job and immediately run a 10046 trace on it? The = information from that trace may not represent what is happened the = prevous night because the conditions such as the load on the database = are different. However with statspack information I might see that the = number of direct path reads and writes went up significantly during that = period from their norm, and the waits also increased. Remember the = information is collected every 10 minutes I can now get the plan = information as well. Is there a hash join. Time to check the = statistics. =20 Perhaps the problem is not being caused by the program the person is = calling about, but by another. Statspack can be helpful here as well. = If I cannot figure it out I can still try tracing the program or set a = login trigger to start the trace when the job runs that night. Of = course Ideally I should have already collected a job profile ... Something like =20 Call Duration Calls = Duration/Call -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ----- direct path write 95.28s 81.1% 5707 0.02s direct path read 21.47s 18.3% 7632 0.00s SQL*Net message from client 0.59s 0.5% 4 0.15s db file scattered read 0.17s 0.1% 652 0.00s SQL*Net message to client 0.00s 0.0% 4 0.00s db file sequential read 0.00s 0.0% 1 0.00s Total cpu time: 30.5 seconds And be ready to compare it with what the new trace delivers. Finally there are some jobs which manipulate data which are impossible = to repeat because the data has changed. What do you run the 10046 trace = on then? Statspack is certainly no 10046 trace, but it is not useless. Ian MacGregor Stanford Linear Accelerator Center ian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx =20 -----Original Message----- From: Andy Rivenes [mailto:arivenes@xxxxxxxx]=20 Sent: Monday, February 02, 2004 10:51 AM To: oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: RE: Capacity Planner from OEM VS Statspack However, what you're really collecting is "workload" information. It's = only=20 useful, as Cary stated, for capacity planning, or what you stated, for=20 trends. You're not going to solve a "performance" problem with this = level=20 of information. Andy Rivenes arivenes@xxxxxxxx At 10:00 AM 2/2/2004 -0800, MacGregor, Ian A. wrote: >I have to disagree here. Sometimes one needs to take a top-down=20 >approach >to tuning. Measuring things such as CPU usage and I/O counts can be=20 >useful. For instance here's a report for a very lightly loaded system=20 >based on statspack data. > > >DATABASE BEGIN_TIME END_TIME Physical Reads=20 >Physical Writes CPU SECONDS ELAPSED SECONDS >---------- -------------------- -------------------- -------------- >--------------- ----------- --------------- >ORAP 12-JAN-2004:00:00:03=20 >12-JAN-2004:01:00:05 14725 7697 224.005=20 >3602 >ORAP 12-JAN-2004:01:00:05=20 >12-JAN-2004:02:00:02 6271 2125 5.03=20 >3597 >ORAP 12-JAN-2004:02:00:02=20 >12-JAN-2004:03:00:04 66066 1043 6.105=20 >3602 >ORAP 12-JAN-2004:03:00:04=20 >12-JAN-2004:04:00:02 1496 1125 3.68=20 >3598 >ORAP 12-JAN-2004:04:00:02=20 >12-JAN-2004:05:00:04 1716 1462 3.995=20 >3602 >ORAP 12-JAN-2004:05:00:04=20 >12-JAN-2004:06:00:01 961 1721 3.71=20 >3597 >ORAP 12-JAN-2004:06:00:01=20 >12-JAN-2004:07:00:03 3779 1032 3.985=20 >3602 >ORAP 12-JAN-2004:07:00:03=20 >12-JAN-2004:08:00:06 16436 2026 5.84=20 >3603 >ORAP 12-JAN-2004:08:00:06=20 >12-JAN-2004:09:00:03 231051 2634 14.43=20 >3597 >ORAP 12-JAN-2004:09:00:03=20 >12-JAN-2004:10:00:05 137762 1245 15.605=20 >3602 >ORAP 12-JAN-2004:10:00:05=20 >12-JAN-2004:11:00:03 183870 1163 15.21=20 >3598 >ORAP 12-JAN-2004:11:00:03=20 >12-JAN-2004:12:00:05 143757 1166 12.975=20 >3602 >ORAP 12-JAN-2004:12:00:05=20 >12-JAN-2004:13:00:02 20349 1088 4.705=20 >3597 >ORAP 12-JAN-2004:13:00:02=20 >12-JAN-2004:14:00:04 195781 1827 13.355=20 >3602 >ORAP 12-JAN-2004:14:00:04=20 >12-JAN-2004:15:00:02 26901 1538 9.53=20 >3598 >ORAP 12-JAN-2004:15:00:02=20 >12-JAN-2004:16:00:04 43434 1039 8.205=20 >3602 >ORAP 12-JAN-2004:16:00:04=20 >12-JAN-2004:17:00:01 61892 1747 8.485=20 >3597 >ORAP 12-JAN-2004:17:00:01=20 >12-JAN-2004:18:00:04 36268 819 5.99=20 >3603 >ORAP 12-JAN-2004:18:00:04=20 >12-JAN-2004:19:00:01 87842 1302 8.4=20 >3597 >ORAP 12-JAN-2004:19:00:01=20 >12-JAN-2004:20:00:03 1256 653 4.625=20 >3602 >ORAP 12-JAN-2004:20:00:03=20 >12-JAN-2004:21:00:01 197415 1086 99.765=20 >3598 >ORAP 12-JAN-2004:21:00:01=20 >12-JAN-2004:22:00:03 556 1386 3.235=20 >3602 >ORAP 12-JAN-2004:22:00:03=20 >12-JAN-2004:23:00:06 1074 697 3.22=20 >3603 >ORAP 12-JAN-2004:23:00:06=20 >13-JAN-2004:00:00:03 14856 927 4.495=20 >3597 >ORAP 13-JAN-2004:00:00:03=20 > > > >If I have a report which deviates from this, then I can start >looking more closely. The statspack information is gathered every ten = >minutes. I can then propely trace the statements which are candidate=20 >problems. I can also get more information. If the CPU count goes up = is=20 >it due to an increase of logical I/Os. How much of the physical I/O is = >direct and to what tablespaces etc. > >There are many problems with statspack and the virtual views upon which = >it >is based. Counters resetting are going negative, the frequency of the=20 >updates etc. I have made elaborate systems, chucked them out of=20 >frustration, changed tactics and tried again. > >At one time I was totally against such systems because they were not >perfect, actually far from it. But I came to realize that though=20 >statspack is inadequate, it is not useless. > >Ian MacGregor >Stanford Linear Accelerator Center >ian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---------------------------------------------------------------- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com ---------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe send email to: oracle-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx put = 'unsubscribe' in the subject line. -- Archives are at //www.freelists.org/archives/oracle-l/ FAQ is at //www.freelists.org/help/fom-serve/cache/1.html ----------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com ---------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe send email to: oracle-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx put 'unsubscribe' in the subject line. -- Archives are at //www.freelists.org/archives/oracle-l/ FAQ is at //www.freelists.org/help/fom-serve/cache/1.html ----------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com ---------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe send email to: oracle-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx put 'unsubscribe' in the subject line. -- Archives are at //www.freelists.org/archives/oracle-l/ FAQ is at //www.freelists.org/help/fom-serve/cache/1.html -----------------------------------------------------------------