Re: Accessing ASH is slow
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 11:25:05 +0200
Message-ID: <51EE4BF1.5070701_at_usn-it.de>
Hi Mark,
thanks for your reply.
You are absolutely right with wasting prod resources for DBA research on mass data. Trouble is, that coming on-site for helping quickly does not always allow to build up infrastructure, or even duplicate data. And I am fully aware that I am talking about contrary aims here: Quickness and refusing to do the best way to make it go.
But in fact, you told me a best practice, nevertheless. :)
In this special case, I found a very interesting reason for the slowness. And it was my own booby trap... If you are interested:
v$active_session_history joins v$ash and v$kewash by various predicates,
including column NEDD_AWR_SAMPLE of both tables. In my case, NLS_SORT
was set to BINARY_CI and NLS_COMP was set to LINGUISTIC. So the
comparision was changed from
"S.NEED_AWR_SAMPLE=A.NEED_AWR_SAMPLE" (which could have been supported
by a fixed index)
to
NLSSORT(S.NEED_AWR_SAMPLE,'nls_sort=''BINARY_CI''')=NLSSORT(A.NEED_AWR_SAMPLE,'nls_sort=''BINARY_CI''')
which causes a full access to the table.
Gnahhhh. :)
Regards
Martin
Mark W. Farnham schrieb:
> I personally think it is a bad practice to consume production RDBMS cycles
> doing ad hoc analysis of metrics.
-- Usn's IT Blog for Oracle and Linux http://www.usn-it.de -- Usn's IT Blog for Oracle and Linux http://www.usn-it.de -- http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-lReceived on Tue Jul 23 2013 - 11:25:05 CEST