all groups > sql server programming > august 2003 >
You're in the

sql server programming

group:

Recompiling SPs? Why so often? Help!


Recompiling SPs? Why so often? Help! ecamptx NO[at]SPAM hotmail.com
8/8/2003 6:42:40 PM
sql server programming:
Server Info: W2k Adv, WSSE 2k, 4 Proc, 4G RAM

Our DBA reports that he has to continually recompile stored procedures
to keep our application running. The SPs do not change during the
day, so what would cause it to need to be recompiled.

Basically, our app times out on queries - fixed by recompiling. Any
ideas? (Just pointing me to the right references would be most
appreciated.)

I'm not looking for a specific fix, but a basic understanding of the
cause/effect going on here... or stuff I can look into.

Thanks,

Re: Recompiling SPs? Why so often? Help! sampangi
8/8/2003 6:53:57 PM
Pls refer to the following link

http://www.sql-server-performance.com/rd_optimizing_sp_recompiles.asp

HTH,
Srinivas Sampangi

[quoted text, click to view]

Re: Recompiling SPs? Why so often? Help! Andrew J. Kelly
8/9/2003 8:46:29 AM
Eric,

The link that Srinivas gave while informative may not actually answer your
question. That deals with sp's that recompile on their own and you are
stating that you need to recompile to fix the issue. One reason why
recompiling a sp will increase it's speed is due to the fact you have a
cached plan that is no longer efficient for the data currently in the db.
This may be due to lots of data inserts, update or deletes, especially bulk
loads. If the statistics are not being automatically kept up the stats can
easily become out of date and produce bad query plans where they may have
been correct for the previous size of the data. Do you have Auto Create and
Auto Update statistics turned on for that db? If not you might think about
turning it on. Has your dba done any analysis to see what is different in
the plans between the time it runs OK and the time it doesn't? Another
possibility could be something called parameter sniffing. Here is a very
good description from Bart at MS that may be of help:


The reason for the performance difference stems from a feature called
"parameter sniffing". Consider a stored proc defined as follows:

CREATE PROC proc1 @p1 int AS
SELECT * FROM table1 WHERE c1 = @p1
GO

Keep in mind that the server has to compile a complete execution plan for
the proc before the proc begins to execute. In 6.5, at compile time SQL
didn't know what the value of @p1 was, so it had to make a lot of guesses
when compiling a plan. Suppose all of the actual parameter values for
"@p1 int" that a user ever passed into this stored proc were unique
integers that were greater than 0, but suppose 40% of the [c1] values in
[table1] were, in fact, 0. SQL would use the average density of the
column to estimate the number of rows that this predicate would return;
this would be an overestimate, and SQL would might choose a table scan
over an index seek based on the rowcount estimates. A table scan would
be the best plan if the parameter value was 0, but unfortunately it
happens that users will never or rarely pass @p1=0, so performance of the
stored proc for more typical parameters suffers.

In SQL 7.0 or 2000, suppose you executed this proc for the first time
(when the sp plan is not in cache) with the command "EXEC proc1 @p1 =
10". Parameter sniffing allows SQL to insert the known value of
parameter @p1 into the query at compile time before a plan for the query
is generated. Because SQL knows that the value of @p1 is not 0, it can
compile a plan that is tailored to the class of parameters that is
actually passed into the proc, so for example it might select an index
seek instead of a table scan based on the smaller estimated rowcount --
this is a good thing if most of the time 0 is not the value passed as
@p1. Generally speaking, this feature allows more efficient stored proc
execution plans, but a key requirement for everything to work as expected
is that the parameter values used for compilation be "typical".

In your case, the problem is that you have default NULL values for your
parameters ("@Today DATETIME = NULL, ...") that are not typical because
the parameter values are changed inside the stored proc before they are
used -- as a result NULL will never actually be used to search the
column. If the first execution of this stored proc doesn't pass in an
explicit value for the @Today parameter, SQL believes that its value will
be NULL. When SQL compiles the plan for this sp it substitutes NULL for
each occurrence of @Today that is embedded within a query.
Unfortunately, after execution begins the first thing the stored proc
does is change @Today to a non-NULL value if it is found to be NULL, but
unfortunately SQL doesn't know about this at compile time. Because NULL
is a very atypical parameter value, the plan that SQL generates may not
be a good one for the new value of the parameter that is assigned at
execution time.

So, the bottom line is that if you assign defaults to your sp parameters
and later use those same parameters in a query, the defaults should be
"typical" because they will be used during plan generation. If you must
use defaults and business logic dictates that they be atypical (as may be
the case here if app modifications are not an option), there are two
possible solutions if you determine that the substitution of atypical
parameter values is causing bad plans:

1. "Disable" parameter sniffing by using local DECLARE'd variables that
you SET equal to the parameters inside the stored proc, and use the local
variables instead of the offending parameters in the queries. This is the
solution that you found yourself. SQL can't use parameter sniffing in
this case so it must make some guesses, but in this case the guess based
on average column density is better than the plan based on a specific but
"wrong" parameter value (NULL).

2. Nest the affected queries somehow so that they run within a different
context that will require a distinct execution plan. There are several
possibilities here. for example:
a. Put the affected queries in a different "child" stored proc. If
you execute that stored proc within this one *after* the parameter @Today
has been changed to its final value, parameter sniffing will suddenly
become your friend because the value SQL uses to compile the queries
inside the child stored proc is the actual value that will be used in the
query.
b. Use sp_executesql to execute the affected queries. The plan won't
be generated until the sp_executesql stmt actually runs, which is of
course after the parameter values have been changed.
c. Use dynamic SQL ("EXEC (@sql)") to execute the affected queries.
An equivalent approach would be to put the query in a child stored proc
just like 2.a, but execute it within the parent proc with EXEC WITH
RECOMPILE.

Option #1 seems to have worked well for you in this case, although
sometimes one of the options in #2 is a preferable choice. Here are some
guidelines, although when you're dealing with something as complicated as
the query optimizer experimentation is often the best approach <g>:

- If you have only one "class" (defined as values that have similar
density in the table) of actual parameter value that is used within a
query (even if there are other classes of data in the base table that are
never or rarely searched on), 2.a. or 2.b is probably the best option.
This is because these options permit the actual parameter values to be
used during compilation which should result in the most efficient query
plan for that class of parameter.
- If you have multiple "classes" of parameter value (for example, for
the column being searched, half the table data is NULL, the other half
are unique integers, and you may do searches on either class), 2.c can be
effective. The downside is that a new plan for the query must be
AddThis Social Bookmark Button