| Groups | Blog | Home |
sql server (alternate) : this is driving me nuts - solicit help from the gurus
I hope some one can help me with this. I am using sql server 2000 [Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - 8.00.818 (Intel X86) May 31 2003 16:08:15 Copyright (c) 1988-2003 Microsoft Corporation Enterprise Edition on Windows NT 5.0 (Build 2195: Service Pack 4)] I have a stored procedure that is using cursors and a few joins, and writes to a few tables. (I can post the code if that will help) The stored procedure takes approximately 27 seconds to complete when executed inside query analyser. However, if I run the stored procedure source directly inside query analyser (like a long sql script), it takes only 3 seconds!! These results are consistent and reproducible. I would think a stored procedure stores the plan, and I would expect better optimization. Why am I witnessing the opposite behaviour? Any one has any experience? The server is manned by DBAs (I work at a large corporation), so I believe it is well configured. We have noticed similar behaviour on data restores on a different physical server. Thanks in advance,
Could be a long shot but try adding a with recompile to the stored
proc and updating the stats on the tables. [quoted text, click to view] praty77-google@yahoo.com (Praty77) wrote in message news:<6c19a8f5.0404061536.74ad2c16@posting.google.com>...
> Hi - > I hope some one can help me with this. > > I am using sql server 2000 > [Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - 8.00.818 (Intel X86) May 31 2003 > 16:08:15 Copyright (c) 1988-2003 Microsoft Corporation Enterprise > Edition on Windows NT 5.0 (Build 2195: Service Pack 4)] > > I have a stored procedure that is using cursors and a few joins, and > writes to a few tables. (I can post the code if that will help) The > stored procedure takes approximately 27 seconds to complete when > executed inside query analyser. However, if I run the stored procedure > source directly inside query analyser (like a long sql script), it > takes only 3 seconds!! These results are consistent and reproducible. > > I would think a stored procedure stores the plan, and I would expect > better optimization. Why am I witnessing the opposite behaviour? Any > one has any experience? > > The server is manned by DBAs (I work at a large corporation), so I > believe it is well configured. We have noticed similar behaviour on > data restores on a different physical server. > > Thanks in advance,
[quoted text, click to view]
praty77-google@yahoo.com (Praty77) wrote in message news:<6c19a8f5.0404061536.74ad2c16@posting.google.com>... > Hi - > I hope some one can help me with this. > > I am using sql server 2000 > [Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - 8.00.818 (Intel X86) May 31 2003 > 16:08:15 Copyright (c) 1988-2003 Microsoft Corporation Enterprise > Edition on Windows NT 5.0 (Build 2195: Service Pack 4)] > > I have a stored procedure that is using cursors and a few joins, and > writes to a few tables. (I can post the code if that will help) The > stored procedure takes approximately 27 seconds to complete when > executed inside query analyser. However, if I run the stored procedure > source directly inside query analyser (like a long sql script), it > takes only 3 seconds!! These results are consistent and reproducible. > > I would think a stored procedure stores the plan, and I would expect > better optimization. Why am I witnessing the opposite behaviour? Any > one has any experience? > > The server is manned by DBAs (I work at a large corporation), so I > believe it is well configured. We have noticed similar behaviour on > data restores on a different physical server. > > Thanks in advance, > -praty77 One possible explanation for this is parameter sniffing: http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=uln5kiSpBHA.2088%40tkmsftngp03
Simon -
thanks. I do not think that explains the 10 times performance problem in my case. I am not using any default parameters. Any other thoughts? praty77 [quoted text, click to view] sql@hayes.ch (Simon Hayes) wrote in message news:<60cd0137.0404070102.7c6fb9a4@posting.google.com>...
> praty77-google@yahoo.com (Praty77) wrote in message news:<6c19a8f5.0404061536.74ad2c16@posting.google.com>... > > Hi - > > I hope some one can help me with this. > > > > I am using sql server 2000 > > [Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - 8.00.818 (Intel X86) May 31 2003 > > 16:08:15 Copyright (c) 1988-2003 Microsoft Corporation Enterprise > > Edition on Windows NT 5.0 (Build 2195: Service Pack 4)] > > > > I have a stored procedure that is using cursors and a few joins, and > > writes to a few tables. (I can post the code if that will help) The > > stored procedure takes approximately 27 seconds to complete when > > executed inside query analyser. However, if I run the stored procedure > > source directly inside query analyser (like a long sql script), it > > takes only 3 seconds!! These results are consistent and reproducible. > > > > I would think a stored procedure stores the plan, and I would expect > > better optimization. Why am I witnessing the opposite behaviour? Any > > one has any experience? > > > > The server is manned by DBAs (I work at a large corporation), so I > > believe it is well configured. We have noticed similar behaviour on > > data restores on a different physical server. > > > > Thanks in advance, > > -praty77 > > One possible explanation for this is parameter sniffing: > > http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=uln5kiSpBHA.2088%40tkmsftngp03 >
Introduce
SET NOCOUNT ON if it is not present . If you are running SP as a query and substituting parametes of the SP with constant values in the code , execution will be faster . Srinivas [quoted text, click to view] praty77-google@yahoo.com (Praty77) wrote in message news:<6c19a8f5.0404061536.74ad2c16@posting.google.com>...
> Hi - > I hope some one can help me with this. > > I am using sql server 2000 > [Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - 8.00.818 (Intel X86) May 31 2003 > 16:08:15 Copyright (c) 1988-2003 Microsoft Corporation Enterprise > Edition on Windows NT 5.0 (Build 2195: Service Pack 4)] > > I have a stored procedure that is using cursors and a few joins, and > writes to a few tables. (I can post the code if that will help) The > stored procedure takes approximately 27 seconds to complete when > executed inside query analyser. However, if I run the stored procedure > source directly inside query analyser (like a long sql script), it > takes only 3 seconds!! These results are consistent and reproducible. > > I would think a stored procedure stores the plan, and I would expect > better optimization. Why am I witnessing the opposite behaviour? Any > one has any experience? > > The server is manned by DBAs (I work at a large corporation), so I > believe it is well configured. We have noticed similar behaviour on > data restores on a different physical server. > > Thanks in advance,
srini -
thanks. The fact is ... it is 10 times slower. And sporadically the speed problem disappears. I do not think that is an issue... it appears it is some database internals problem (proc overhead too high). I am hoping someone can help! praty [quoted text, click to view] masri@vsnl.com (M A Srinivas) wrote in message news:<f7e90f78.0404082230.7d613bc6@posting.google.com>...
> Introduce > SET NOCOUNT ON if it is not present . > > If you are running SP as a query and substituting parametes of the SP > with constant values in the code , execution will be faster . > > Srinivas > > > praty77-google@yahoo.com (Praty77) wrote in message news:<6c19a8f5.0404061536.74ad2c16@posting.google.com>... > > Hi - > > I hope some one can help me with this. > > > > I am using sql server 2000 > > [Microsoft SQL Server 2000 - 8.00.818 (Intel X86) May 31 2003 > > 16:08:15 Copyright (c) 1988-2003 Microsoft Corporation Enterprise > > Edition on Windows NT 5.0 (Build 2195: Service Pack 4)] > > > > I have a stored procedure that is using cursors and a few joins, and > > writes to a few tables. (I can post the code if that will help) The > > stored procedure takes approximately 27 seconds to complete when > > executed inside query analyser. However, if I run the stored procedure > > source directly inside query analyser (like a long sql script), it > > takes only 3 seconds!! These results are consistent and reproducible. > > > > I would think a stored procedure stores the plan, and I would expect > > better optimization. Why am I witnessing the opposite behaviour? Any > > one has any experience? > > > > The server is manned by DBAs (I work at a large corporation), so I > > believe it is well configured. We have noticed similar behaviour on > > data restores on a different physical server. > > > > Thanks in advance,
Don't see what you're looking for? Try a search.
|
January 2003
June 2003
July 2003
August 2003
September 2003
October 2003
November 2003
December 2003
January 2004
February 2004
March 2004
April 2004
May 2004
June 2004
July 2004
August 2004
September 2004
October 2004
November 2004
December 2004
January 2005
February 2005
March 2005
April 2005
May 2005
June 2005
July 2005
August 2005
September 2005
October 2005
November 2005
December 2005
January 2006
February 2006
March 2006
April 2006
May 2006
June 2006
July 2006
August 2006
September 2006
October 2006
November 2006
December 2006
January 2007
February 2007
March 2007
April 2007
May 2007
June 2007
July 2007
August 2007
September 2007
October 2007
| home · blog · groups | Questions? Comments? Contact the dn |