SQL

On November 18 and 19, I’ll be presenting along with Tanel Põder, Jonathan Lewis, and Kerry Osborne in a virtual (GoToWebinar) seminar called Systematic Oracle SQL Optimization in Real Life. Here are the essentials:

The title pretty much says it. In Oracle 11.2, if you have the Diag+Tuning Pack licenses and the SQL monitoring kicks in for your SQL statement, then instead of the old fashioned ERRORSTACK dump reading you can just query the V$SQL_MONITOR.BIND_XML to find the values and metadata of your SQL statement’s bind variables.

I’ve written an example here:

• http://tech.e2sn.com/oracle/troubleshooting/oracle-s-real-time-sql-monitoring-feature-v-sql_monitor

And a related comment – V$SQL_BIND_CAPTURE is not a reliable way for identifying the current bind variable values in use. Oracle’s bind capture mechanism does not capture every single bind variable into SGA (it would slow down apps which run lots of short statements with bind variables). The bind capture only selectively samples bind values, during the first execution of a new cursor and then every 15 minutes from there (controlled by _cursor_bind_capture_interval parameter), assuming that new executions of that same cursor are still being started (the capture happens only when execution starts, not later during the execution).

Yes, it’s official. I’m organizing a virtual conference with some of THE top speakers in the world. The topic is Systematic Oracle SQL Optimization (in real world)

The dates are 18-19 November, the conference lasts for 4 hours on both days, so you’ll be able to still get some work done as well (and immediately apply the knowledge acquired!).

Well, none of the speakers need introduction, but just in case you’ve lived in space for last 20 years, here are the links to their blogs :)

• Jonathan Lewis
• Cary Millsap
• Kerry Osborne
• Tanel Poder (this site)

I can tell you, (at least the first 3) people in the above list ROCK!!!

And all of them are OakTable members too :)

This conference will have 4 x 1.5 hour sessions, each delivered by a separate speaker. We aim to systematically cover the path of:

1. Finding out where is the performance problem (and which SQLs cause it)
2. Finding out what is the problem SQL execution plan doing and which part of it is slow
3. How to write and fix your code so that the optimizer wouldn’t hate your SQL
4. How to fix the SQL execution plan performance problem when you can’t touch the application code!

And as this is the first (pilot) virtual conference, then the price is awesome, especially if you get the early bird rate by signing up before 1. November!

So, check out the abstracts, details, agenda and sign up here!

#000000;">#0000ff;">http://tech.e2sn.com/virtual-conferences

P.S. I expect this event to be awesome!

This is just a short note on the parameter introduced in the 11gR2 called _connect_by_use_union_all. I’ve noticed it for the first time in Doc ID 7210630.8, which gives a brief overview of the changes made to the way CBO generates plans for hierarchical queries. As usually happens, the change helps to one problem, but produces [...]

So, what do you think is the most fundamental difference between NESTED LOOPS and HASH JOINS?

This is not a trick question. You’re welcome to write your opinion in the comments section – and I’ll follow up with an article about it (my opinion) later today…

Update: The answer article is here:

http://blog.tanelpoder.com/2010/10/06/a-the-most-fundamental-difference-between-hash-and-nested-loop-joins/

Here’s a little trick question. Check out the execution plan below.

What the hell, shouldn’t the INDEX/TABLE access be the other way around?!

Also, how come it’s TABLE ACCESS FULL (and not by INDEX ROWID) in there?

This question is with a little gotcha, but can you come up with a query which produced such plan? ;-)

----------------------------------------------
| Id  | Operation          | Name   | E-Rows |
----------------------------------------------
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT   |        |        |
|*  1 |  INDEX RANGE SCAN  | PK_EMP |      1 |
|*  2 |   TABLE ACCESS FULL| EMP    |      1 |
----------------------------------------------

You most likely have seen this error before: ORA-01719: outer join operator (+) not allowed in operand of OR or IN Cause: An outer join appears in an or clause. Action: If A and B are predicates, to get the effect of (A(+) or B), try (select where (A(+) and not B)) union all (select [...]

This week I’ve seen an issue with a CONNECT BY query: for some reason Oracle 10.2.0.4 decided to build a weird plan (the query is weird too, but that’s not my point here ). An explanation of why that happened looks interesting, so here it is. Set up: drop table t2 cascade constraints purge; drop [...]

Gwen Shapira has written an article about a good example of a non-trivial performance problem.

I’m not talking about anything advanced here (such as bugs or problems arising at OS/Oracle touchpoint) but that sometimes the root cause of a problem (or at least the reason why you notice this problem now) is not something deeply technical or related to some specific SQL optimizer feature or a configuration issue. Instead of focusing on the first symptom you see immediately, it pays off to take a step back and see how the problem task/application/SQL is actually used by the users or client applications.

In other words, talk to the users, ask how exactly they experience the problem and then drill down from there.

In my Beyond Oracle Wait interface article I troubleshooted a test case where an execution plan somehow went “crazy” and started burning CPU, lots of logical IOs and the query never completed.

I have uploaded the test case I used to my new website, to a section where I will upload some of my demo scripts which I show at my seminars (and people can download & test these themselves too):

http://tech.e2sn.com/oracle-seminar-demo-scripts

Basically what I do is this:

1. I run the query with bind variable values where only a handful of rows match the filter condition. Thus Oracle picks nested loop join (and indexed access path)
2. Then I run the same query with different bind values, where a lot of rows match the filter condition. Oracle reuses existing execution plan (with nested loops!!!). Oracle ends up looping through a lot of blocks again and again (because nested loop visits the “right” side of the join once for every row coming from the “left” side of the join).

Using nested loops over lots of rows is a sure way to kill your performance.

And an interesting thing with my script is that the problem still happens in Oracle 11.1 and 11.2 too!

Oracle 11g has Adaptive Cursor Sharing, right? This should take care of such a problem, right? Well no, adaptive bind variable peeking is a reactive technique – it only kicks in after the problem has happened!