RE: Wait event problems

2002-06-14 Thread Jesse, Rich

Unfortunately, the original paper in DOC format is required to get any value
out of the tests, and the doc isn't available at fors.com anymore (404 from
the link).  Does anyone have this (Doc 285 from EOUG '97)?

TIA!

Rich Jesse   System/Database Administrator
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  Quad/Tech International, Sussex, WI USA


> -Original Message-
> From: Deshpande, Kirti [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, June 14, 2002 2:24 PM
> To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
> Subject: RE: Wait event problems
> 
> 
> Here is an old paper from an Oracle analyst discussing 
> SDU/TDU settings...
> http://www.fors.com/eoug97/papers/0285.htm. 
> 
> I never came across any upgraded version of the same. 
> 
> - Kirti
-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
-- 
Author: Jesse, Rich
  INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Fat City Network Services-- (858) 538-5051  FAX: (858) 538-5051
San Diego, California-- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists

To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
(or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from).  You may
also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).



RE: Wait event problems

2002-06-14 Thread Deshpande, Kirti

Here is an old paper from an Oracle analyst discussing SDU/TDU settings...
http://www.fors.com/eoug97/papers/0285.htm. 

I never came across any upgraded version of the same. 

- Kirti

-Original Message-
Sent: Friday, June 14, 2002 2:01 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L


Hello,

There are many theoretical things about tuning SDU/TDU. But, I don't think
tuning SDU/TDU makes benefit in practice.


Kathy Duret wrote:

> FWIW
>
> I tried "mucking" around with the SDU/TDU parameters on both the client
and the server and never got much success.  Tried to up the 2K to 8K but it
still was sending alot of 2k packets.  I had more results upping the array
size to 90-100 in glogin (default is 15).
>
> Kathy
>
> -Original Message-
> Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2002 6:53 PM
> To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
>
> This is never an "idle" event.  The phrase "more data from client"
indicates
> that the individual SQL operation is larger than a single SQL*Net packet.
> No big deal;  it happens all the time, and SQL*Net handles it with
> "continuation packets".  Only issue is that the client is taking a lot of
> time between each packet sent.  Jack's conclusion that the client process
> (in the "client-server" database connection) is not providing data in a
> "timely fashion" is exactly correct.  You most likely have a slow client
> process...
>
> Oracle documentation frequently tries to encourage mucking about with
> SDU/TDU parameters in SQL*Net configuration files, but I've rarely seen
this
> be more effective than tuning the client process...  :-)
>

-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
-- 
Author: Deshpande, Kirti
  INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Fat City Network Services-- (858) 538-5051  FAX: (858) 538-5051
San Diego, California-- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists

To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
(or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from).  You may
also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).



Re: Wait event problems

2002-06-14 Thread Danisment Gazi Unal (ubTools)

Hello,

There are many theoretical things about tuning SDU/TDU. But, I don't think tuning 
SDU/TDU makes benefit in practice.


Kathy Duret wrote:

> FWIW
>
> I tried "mucking" around with the SDU/TDU parameters on both the client and the 
>server and never got much success.  Tried to up the 2K to 8K but it still was sending 
>alot of 2k packets.  I had more results upping the array size to 90-100 in glogin 
>(default is 15).
>
> Kathy
>
> -Original Message-
> Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2002 6:53 PM
> To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
>
> This is never an "idle" event.  The phrase "more data from client" indicates
> that the individual SQL operation is larger than a single SQL*Net packet.
> No big deal;  it happens all the time, and SQL*Net handles it with
> "continuation packets".  Only issue is that the client is taking a lot of
> time between each packet sent.  Jack's conclusion that the client process
> (in the "client-server" database connection) is not providing data in a
> "timely fashion" is exactly correct.  You most likely have a slow client
> process...
>
> Oracle documentation frequently tries to encourage mucking about with
> SDU/TDU parameters in SQL*Net configuration files, but I've rarely seen this
> be more effective than tuning the client process...  :-)
>
> - Original Message -
> To: "Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2002 10:08 AM
>
> > Lee,
> >
> > This is an idle wait event, meaning that the query
> > process is waiting on instructions from the client.
> >
> > Usually this process is benign, but sometimes can
> > indicate that the feeding process is not providing
> > data in a timely fashion.
> >
> > hth,
> >
> > jack silvey
> >
> > --- Robertson Lee - lerobe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > > All,
> > >
> > > Oracle 8.0.5.0.0
> > > Tru64 v4.0f
> > >
> > > We are running a job and statspack reports show that
> > > our only problem (it is
> > > running like a dog) is the following
> > >
> > > SQL*Net more data from client.
> > >
> > > Done some reading and still none the wiser. Anyone
> > > else had this sort of
> > > problem and if so how did you get around it ??
> > >
> > > Regards
> > >
> > > Lee
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > The information contained in this communication is
> > > confidential, is intended only for the use of the
> > > recipient
> > > named above, and may be legally privileged. If the
> > > reader
> > > of this message is not the intended recipient, you
> > > are
> > > hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution
> > > or
> > > copying of this communication is strictly
> > > prohibited.
> > > If you have received this communication in error,
> > > please
> > > re-send this communication to the sender and delete
> > > the
> > > original message or any copy of it from your
> > > computer
> > > system.
> > >
> >
> >
> > __
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
> > http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com
> > --
> > Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
> > --
> > Author: Jack Silvey
> >   INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > Fat City Network Services-- (858) 538-5051  FAX: (858) 538-5051
> > San Diego, California-- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists
> > 
> > To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
> > to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
> > the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
> > (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from).  You may
> > also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).
>
> --
> Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
> --
> Author: Tim Gorman
>   INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Fat City Network Services-- (858) 538-5051  FAX: (858) 538-5051
> San Diego, California-- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists
> 
> To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
> to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
> the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
> (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from).  You may
> also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).
>
> Confidential
> This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are the property
> of Belkin Components and/or its affiliates, are confidential,
> and are intended solely for the use of the individual or
> entity to whom this e-mail is addressed.  If you are not one
> of the named recipients or otherwise have reason to believe
> that you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the
> sender and delete this message immediately from your computer.
> Any other use, retention, dissemination, forwarding, printing
> or copying of this e-mail is strictly

RE: Wait event problems

2002-06-14 Thread Kathy Duret

FWIW

I tried "mucking" around with the SDU/TDU parameters on both the client and the server 
and never got much success.  Tried to up the 2K to 8K but it still was sending alot of 
2k packets.  I had more results upping the array size to 90-100 in glogin (default is 
15).

Kathy

-Original Message-
Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2002 6:53 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L


This is never an "idle" event.  The phrase "more data from client" indicates
that the individual SQL operation is larger than a single SQL*Net packet.
No big deal;  it happens all the time, and SQL*Net handles it with
"continuation packets".  Only issue is that the client is taking a lot of
time between each packet sent.  Jack's conclusion that the client process
(in the "client-server" database connection) is not providing data in a
"timely fashion" is exactly correct.  You most likely have a slow client
process...

Oracle documentation frequently tries to encourage mucking about with
SDU/TDU parameters in SQL*Net configuration files, but I've rarely seen this
be more effective than tuning the client process...  :-)

- Original Message -
To: "Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2002 10:08 AM


> Lee,
>
> This is an idle wait event, meaning that the query
> process is waiting on instructions from the client.
>
> Usually this process is benign, but sometimes can
> indicate that the feeding process is not providing
> data in a timely fashion.
>
> hth,
>
> jack silvey
>
> --- Robertson Lee - lerobe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > All,
> >
> > Oracle 8.0.5.0.0
> > Tru64 v4.0f
> >
> > We are running a job and statspack reports show that
> > our only problem (it is
> > running like a dog) is the following
> >
> > SQL*Net more data from client.
> >
> > Done some reading and still none the wiser. Anyone
> > else had this sort of
> > problem and if so how did you get around it ??
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Lee
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > The information contained in this communication is
> > confidential, is intended only for the use of the
> > recipient
> > named above, and may be legally privileged. If the
> > reader
> > of this message is not the intended recipient, you
> > are
> > hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution
> > or
> > copying of this communication is strictly
> > prohibited.
> > If you have received this communication in error,
> > please
> > re-send this communication to the sender and delete
> > the
> > original message or any copy of it from your
> > computer
> > system.
> >
>
>
> __
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
> http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com
> --
> Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
> --
> Author: Jack Silvey
>   INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Fat City Network Services-- (858) 538-5051  FAX: (858) 538-5051
> San Diego, California-- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists
> 
> To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
> to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
> the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
> (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from).  You may
> also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).

-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
-- 
Author: Tim Gorman
  INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Fat City Network Services-- (858) 538-5051  FAX: (858) 538-5051
San Diego, California-- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists

To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
(or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from).  You may
also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).

Confidential
This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are the property
of Belkin Components and/or its affiliates, are confidential,
and are intended solely for the use of the individual or
entity to whom this e-mail is addressed.  If you are not one
of the named recipients or otherwise have reason to believe
that you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the
sender and delete this message immediately from your computer.
Any other use, retention, dissemination, forwarding, printing
or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited.
-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
-- 
Author: Kathy Duret
  INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Fat City Network Services-- (858) 538-5051  FAX: (858) 538-5051
San Diego, California-- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists

To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail mes

RE: Wait event problems

2002-06-14 Thread Seefelt, Beth


Excellent information!  Thanks for taking the time to write it all down.

Beth

-Original Message-
Sent: Friday, June 14, 2002 10:42 AM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Cc: Seefelt, Beth


Well, with all the caveats that's a long and boring story, so I'll
shorten
it up.  ;)

1)  SDU/TDU values of 32768, as were specified by our 3rd-party vendor
in
their extremely non-OFA f'd-up install, are not valid.

2)  Specifying SDU/TDU in TNSNAMES.ORA (or ONAMES) is useless unless
it's
corresponding value is also in the server's LISTENER.ORA.  If you don't
specify the value in LISTENER.ORA, you will be using the default SDU
value
of 2048.

3)  Specifying SDU/TDU in a LISTENER.ORA will not work out-of-the-box in
8i.
I've verified this thru a client trace.  Apparently, in 8i, the
automatic
registry of an instance to the listener will overwrite any SDU/TDU
values
specified in the LISTENER.ORA.  The workaround to override the auto
registry, you must declare a bogus SERVICE_NAMES and LOCAL_LISTENER in
the
DB's init.ora and restart the instance.

4)  What value to set SDU?  Test!  On a TEST client set an SDU value in
the
TNSNAMES.ORA (see Oracle docs for how/where).  Then, set the following
in
the client's SQLNET.ORA:

TRACE_LEVEL_CLIENT = SUPPORT
TRACE_FILE_CLIENT = sqlnet
TRACE_DIRECTORY_CLIENT = /some/directory
TRACE_UNIQUE_CLIENT = on

4a)  If you aren't using TNSNAMES, make sure your NAMES.DIRECTORY_PATH
in
the SQLNET.ORA starts with TNSNAMES.

5)  Connect a test client.  Do some work from this client, preferrably
as
close to a "real" user as possible.  Note that the tracefile created
will
contain every bit from every packet sent to and from the client, as well
as
all the overhead involved for debugging, so the file can grow large
quick.
It only less than 5 minutes of testing to produce a 55MB trace file for
us.

6)  Disconnect the test client.  Before running trcasst, you'll need to
edit
the trace file in order to workaround a bug in trcasst.  If you're
Unix-y,
you can use this instead of trying to pull 50+MB into mem (VERY crude
SED --
there's a much more elegant way of doing this!):

mv sqlnet_.trc t.t
sed -e 's/nspsend: /nspsend:/g' t.t >t.tt
rm t.t
sed -e 's/nsprecv: /nsprecv:/g' t.tt >t.t
rm t.tt
sed -e 's/nsprcvs: /nsprcvs:/g' t.t >t.tt
rm t.t
rm sqlnet_.trc
mv t.tt sqlnet_.trc

The "rm"s are in there to reduce the amount of disk needed.  PLEASE
adjust
for your own environment!  If you're using Winders, get CygWin to use
sed
(or use any of a number of tools for search/replace).

7)  trcasst -od sqlnet_.trc >sqlnet_.lis

8)  Examine the .lis file for send/receive packet sizes.  I dumped the
output from a grep of the .lis file to MS Exhell to graph the send and
recieve packets.  It's easier for me to see the need for a larger SDU
when
the graph shows a nice square wave pattern.  The theory being that if
SQL*Net is pushing the maximum SDU size several packets in a row (a
nice,
flat horizontal line at the top of the graph), that the SDU could stand
to
be larger so as to minimize the length of that line.

9)  Repeat steps 5 thru 8 with different values of SDU, remembering to
change both the client and the server, and to restart the listener after
each change.

Anyone care to comment on this?  This is pretty much just what I figured
out
yesterday, so I'm interested to know of any "whoopses" I may have made.
One
thing I'm not sure of is "How big is too big for an SDU value?".

HTH!  GL!  Happy Flag Day!  :)

Rich Jesse   System/Database Administrator
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  Quad/Tech International, Sussex, WI
USA


> -Original Message-
> From: Seefelt, Beth [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2002 7:28 PM
> To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
> Subject: RE: Wait event problems
> 
> 
> 
> Hi Rich,
> 
> I'm curious, what value did you decide on for SDU?  Let us know how it
> works out.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Beth
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2002 1:39 PM
> To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
> 
> 
> Hi Lee,
> 
> I'm investigating a very similar problem on 8.1.6.0.0 on Solaris.  So
> far,
> I've found out that the 3rd-party vendor who setup this debacle had
> inserted
> invalid values for SDU/TDU in tnsnames.ora on the client and
> listener.ora on
> the server.  I'm correcting them now as we speak.  
> (Incidentally, Oracle
> recommends NOT modifying TDU and gives no guidelines as to 
> how to select
> a
> value.)
> 
> Also, our clients are Java apps, which would be my guess as 
> to the root
> of
> the problem.  The clients just aren't fast enough to deal with the
> rather
> la

RE: Wait event problems

2002-06-14 Thread Jesse, Rich

Well, with all the caveats that's a long and boring story, so I'll shorten
it up.  ;)

1)  SDU/TDU values of 32768, as were specified by our 3rd-party vendor in
their extremely non-OFA f'd-up install, are not valid.

2)  Specifying SDU/TDU in TNSNAMES.ORA (or ONAMES) is useless unless it's
corresponding value is also in the server's LISTENER.ORA.  If you don't
specify the value in LISTENER.ORA, you will be using the default SDU value
of 2048.

3)  Specifying SDU/TDU in a LISTENER.ORA will not work out-of-the-box in 8i.
I've verified this thru a client trace.  Apparently, in 8i, the automatic
registry of an instance to the listener will overwrite any SDU/TDU values
specified in the LISTENER.ORA.  The workaround to override the auto
registry, you must declare a bogus SERVICE_NAMES and LOCAL_LISTENER in the
DB's init.ora and restart the instance.

4)  What value to set SDU?  Test!  On a TEST client set an SDU value in the
TNSNAMES.ORA (see Oracle docs for how/where).  Then, set the following in
the client's SQLNET.ORA:

TRACE_LEVEL_CLIENT = SUPPORT
TRACE_FILE_CLIENT = sqlnet
TRACE_DIRECTORY_CLIENT = /some/directory
TRACE_UNIQUE_CLIENT = on

4a)  If you aren't using TNSNAMES, make sure your NAMES.DIRECTORY_PATH in
the SQLNET.ORA starts with TNSNAMES.

5)  Connect a test client.  Do some work from this client, preferrably as
close to a "real" user as possible.  Note that the tracefile created will
contain every bit from every packet sent to and from the client, as well as
all the overhead involved for debugging, so the file can grow large quick.
It only less than 5 minutes of testing to produce a 55MB trace file for us.

6)  Disconnect the test client.  Before running trcasst, you'll need to edit
the trace file in order to workaround a bug in trcasst.  If you're Unix-y,
you can use this instead of trying to pull 50+MB into mem (VERY crude SED --
there's a much more elegant way of doing this!):

mv sqlnet_.trc t.t
sed -e 's/nspsend: /nspsend:/g' t.t >t.tt
rm t.t
sed -e 's/nsprecv: /nsprecv:/g' t.tt >t.t
rm t.tt
sed -e 's/nsprcvs: /nsprcvs:/g' t.t >t.tt
rm t.t
rm sqlnet_.trc
mv t.tt sqlnet_.trc

The "rm"s are in there to reduce the amount of disk needed.  PLEASE adjust
for your own environment!  If you're using Winders, get CygWin to use sed
(or use any of a number of tools for search/replace).

7)  trcasst -od sqlnet_.trc >sqlnet_.lis

8)  Examine the .lis file for send/receive packet sizes.  I dumped the
output from a grep of the .lis file to MS Exhell to graph the send and
recieve packets.  It's easier for me to see the need for a larger SDU when
the graph shows a nice square wave pattern.  The theory being that if
SQL*Net is pushing the maximum SDU size several packets in a row (a nice,
flat horizontal line at the top of the graph), that the SDU could stand to
be larger so as to minimize the length of that line.

9)  Repeat steps 5 thru 8 with different values of SDU, remembering to
change both the client and the server, and to restart the listener after
each change.

Anyone care to comment on this?  This is pretty much just what I figured out
yesterday, so I'm interested to know of any "whoopses" I may have made.  One
thing I'm not sure of is "How big is too big for an SDU value?".

HTH!  GL!  Happy Flag Day!  :)

Rich Jesse   System/Database Administrator
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  Quad/Tech International, Sussex, WI USA


> -Original Message-----
> From: Seefelt, Beth [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2002 7:28 PM
> To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
> Subject: RE: Wait event problems
> 
> 
> 
> Hi Rich,
> 
> I'm curious, what value did you decide on for SDU?  Let us know how it
> works out.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Beth
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2002 1:39 PM
> To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
> 
> 
> Hi Lee,
> 
> I'm investigating a very similar problem on 8.1.6.0.0 on Solaris.  So
> far,
> I've found out that the 3rd-party vendor who setup this debacle had
> inserted
> invalid values for SDU/TDU in tnsnames.ora on the client and
> listener.ora on
> the server.  I'm correcting them now as we speak.  
> (Incidentally, Oracle
> recommends NOT modifying TDU and gives no guidelines as to 
> how to select
> a
> value.)
> 
> Also, our clients are Java apps, which would be my guess as 
> to the root
> of
> the problem.  The clients just aren't fast enough to deal with the
> rather
> large overhead of Java.  But I'm cautiously optimistic on the SDU/TDU
> fix...
> 
> And www.fatcity.com doesn't want to respond, so we'll have to 
> wait a bit
> to
> 

RE: Wait event problems

2002-06-13 Thread Deshpande, Kirti

I would add that the Statspack's Top 5 events miss out other SQL*Net related
waits. Those can not be ignored in the client/server type environments.

I fiddle with the perfstat.stats$idle_event table that contains a list of
such 'idle' events. The events in this table are never reported by statspack
in the 'Top 5' category. And that can be misleading. 

- Kirti 

-Original Message-
Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2002 8:53 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L


This is never an "idle" event.  The phrase "more data from client" indicates
that the individual SQL operation is larger than a single SQL*Net packet.
No big deal;  it happens all the time, and SQL*Net handles it with
"continuation packets".  Only issue is that the client is taking a lot of
time between each packet sent.  Jack's conclusion that the client process
(in the "client-server" database connection) is not providing data in a
"timely fashion" is exactly correct.  You most likely have a slow client
process...

Oracle documentation frequently tries to encourage mucking about with
SDU/TDU parameters in SQL*Net configuration files, but I've rarely seen this
be more effective than tuning the client process...  :-)

- Original Message -
To: "Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2002 10:08 AM


> Lee,
>
> This is an idle wait event, meaning that the query
> process is waiting on instructions from the client.
>
> Usually this process is benign, but sometimes can
> indicate that the feeding process is not providing
> data in a timely fashion.
>
> hth,
>
> jack silvey
>
> --- Robertson Lee - lerobe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > All,
> >
> > Oracle 8.0.5.0.0
> > Tru64 v4.0f
> >
> > We are running a job and statspack reports show that
> > our only problem (it is
> > running like a dog) is the following
> >
> > SQL*Net more data from client.
> >
> > Done some reading and still none the wiser. Anyone
> > else had this sort of
> > problem and if so how did you get around it ??
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Lee
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > The information contained in this communication is
> > confidential, is intended only for the use of the
> > recipient
> > named above, and may be legally privileged. If the
> > reader
> > of this message is not the intended recipient, you
> > are
> > hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution
> > or
> > copying of this communication is strictly
> > prohibited.
> > If you have received this communication in error,
> > please
> > re-send this communication to the sender and delete
> > the
> > original message or any copy of it from your
> > computer
> > system.
> >
>
>
> __
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
> http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com
> --
> Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
> --
> Author: Jack Silvey
>   INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Fat City Network Services-- (858) 538-5051  FAX: (858) 538-5051
> San Diego, California-- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists
> 
> To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
> to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
> the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
> (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from).  You may
> also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).

-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
-- 
Author: Tim Gorman
  INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Fat City Network Services-- (858) 538-5051  FAX: (858) 538-5051
San Diego, California-- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists

To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
(or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from).  You may
also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).
-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
-- 
Author: Deshpande, Kirti
  INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Fat City Network Services-- (858) 538-5051  FAX: (858) 538-5051
San Diego, California-- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists

To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
(or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from).  You may
also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).



Re: Wait event problems

2002-06-13 Thread Jack Silvey

Sorry, Tim is exactly right. Got this confused with
the "SQL*Net message from client" event.

Need to stop drinking more Budweiser and start
drinking more Guiness. At least, that is what *I* am
taking away from this experience.

;)

jack


--- Tim Gorman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This is never an "idle" event.  The phrase "more
> data from client" indicates
> that the individual SQL operation is larger than a
> single SQL*Net packet.
> No big deal;  it happens all the time, and SQL*Net
> handles it with
> "continuation packets".  Only issue is that the
> client is taking a lot of
> time between each packet sent.  Jack's conclusion
> that the client process
> (in the "client-server" database connection) is not
> providing data in a
> "timely fashion" is exactly correct.  You most
> likely have a slow client
> process...
> 
> Oracle documentation frequently tries to encourage
> mucking about with
> SDU/TDU parameters in SQL*Net configuration files,
> but I've rarely seen this
> be more effective than tuning the client process... 
> :-)
> 
> - Original Message -
> To: "Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2002 10:08 AM
> 
> 
> > Lee,
> >
> > This is an idle wait event, meaning that the query
> > process is waiting on instructions from the
> client.
> >
> > Usually this process is benign, but sometimes can
> > indicate that the feeding process is not providing
> > data in a timely fashion.
> >
> > hth,
> >
> > jack silvey
> >
> > --- Robertson Lee - lerobe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > > All,
> > >
> > > Oracle 8.0.5.0.0
> > > Tru64 v4.0f
> > >
> > > We are running a job and statspack reports show
> that
> > > our only problem (it is
> > > running like a dog) is the following
> > >
> > > SQL*Net more data from client.
> > >
> > > Done some reading and still none the wiser.
> Anyone
> > > else had this sort of
> > > problem and if so how did you get around it ??
> > >
> > > Regards
> > >
> > > Lee
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > The information contained in this communication
> is
> > > confidential, is intended only for the use of
> the
> > > recipient
> > > named above, and may be legally privileged. If
> the
> > > reader
> > > of this message is not the intended recipient,
> you
> > > are
> > > hereby notified that any dissemination,
> distribution
> > > or
> > > copying of this communication is strictly
> > > prohibited.
> > > If you have received this communication in
> error,
> > > please
> > > re-send this communication to the sender and
> delete
> > > the
> > > original message or any copy of it from your
> > > computer
> > > system.
> > >
> >
> >
> > __
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
> > http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com
> > --
> > Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ:
> http://www.orafaq.com
> > --
> > Author: Jack Silvey
> >   INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > Fat City Network Services-- (858) 538-5051 
> FAX: (858) 538-5051
> > San Diego, California-- Public Internet
> access / Mailing Lists
> >
>

> > To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an
> E-Mail message
> > to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of
> 'ListGuru') and in
> > the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB
> ORACLE-L
> > (or the name of mailing list you want to be
> removed from).  You may
> > also send the HELP command for other information
> (like subscribing).
> 
> -- 
> Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ:
> http://www.orafaq.com
> -- 
> Author: Tim Gorman
>   INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> Fat City Network Services-- (858) 538-5051  FAX:
> (858) 538-5051
> San Diego, California-- Public Internet
> access / Mailing Lists
>

> To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an
> E-Mail message
> to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of
> 'ListGuru') and in
> the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB
> ORACLE-L
> (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed
> from).  You may
> also send the HELP command for other information
> (like subscribing).


__
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com
-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
-- 
Author: Jack Silvey
  INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Fat City Network Services-- (858) 538-5051  FAX: (858) 538-5051
San Diego, California-- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists

To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
(or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from).  You may
also send the HELP com

RE: Wait event problems

2002-06-13 Thread Seefelt, Beth


Hi Rich,

I'm curious, what value did you decide on for SDU?  Let us know how it
works out.

Thanks,

Beth


-Original Message-
Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2002 1:39 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L


Hi Lee,

I'm investigating a very similar problem on 8.1.6.0.0 on Solaris.  So
far,
I've found out that the 3rd-party vendor who setup this debacle had
inserted
invalid values for SDU/TDU in tnsnames.ora on the client and
listener.ora on
the server.  I'm correcting them now as we speak.  (Incidentally, Oracle
recommends NOT modifying TDU and gives no guidelines as to how to select
a
value.)

Also, our clients are Java apps, which would be my guess as to the root
of
the problem.  The clients just aren't fast enough to deal with the
rather
large overhead of Java.  But I'm cautiously optimistic on the SDU/TDU
fix...

And www.fatcity.com doesn't want to respond, so we'll have to wait a bit
to
search the archives.

GL!

Rich Jesse   System/Database Administrator
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  Quad/Tech International, Sussex, WI
USA


-Original Message-
Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2002 10:23 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L


All,
 
Oracle 8.0.5.0.0
Tru64 v4.0f
 
We are running a job and statspack reports show that our only problem
(it is
running like a dog) is the following
 
SQL*Net more data from client.
 
Done some reading and still none the wiser. Anyone else had this sort of
problem and if so how did you get around it ??
 
Regards
 
Lee
-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
-- 
Author: Jesse, Rich
  INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Fat City Network Services-- (858) 538-5051  FAX: (858) 538-5051
San Diego, California-- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists

To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
(or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from).  You may
also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).
--
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
--
Author: Seefelt, Beth
  INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Fat City Network Services-- (858) 538-5051  FAX: (858) 538-5051
San Diego, California-- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists

To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
(or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from).  You may
also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).



Re: Wait event problems

2002-06-13 Thread Rachel Carmichael

yep, that's the one


--- Mohammad Rafiq <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think Rachel is referring following email from Carry Millsap.. It
> is a 
> really nice explanation of this issue
> Regards
> Rafiq
> 
> 
> 
> I have an example for you (Anjo, I hope you won't mind). A prospect
> we
> visited once upon a time had been fighting a performance problem with
> an
> Oracle Payroll program. They "knew" what their problem was: very
> clearly, v$system_event was telling them that their overwhelmingly
> dominant system performance problem was waits for "latch free."
> (Well,
> no it wasn't. It was waits for the Oracle Payroll program. ;) )
> 
> Actually, the v$system_event view indicated clearly that the top wait
> event was "SQL*Net message from client" (and some other "SQL*Net %"
> stuff), but of course every good DBA knows that you have to discard
> all
> the "SQL*Net" events because they are "idle" events.
> 
> Three months of trying and failing to fix the problem led finally to
> a
> last-resort, desperation hardware upgrade. Twelve 700MHz CPUs became
> twelve new 1,024MHz CPUs. (Don't ask why "waits for latch free" was
> translated as "need to upgrade CPUs.") And unfortunately, the Payroll
> program got *slower*. Not just "seemed slower"--*was* slower.
> 
> After the upgrade failed to help, these guys finally let us come see
> them. We traced the Payroll process (10046, level 8), very carefully
> initiating the trace immediately after the initiation of the Payroll
> run, and very carefully terminating the trace immediately after the
> completion of the Payroll run. The key here is that every second of
> data
> in the trace file was a second of somebody's response time.
> 
> The result was a really fun story. The thing ran in about 33 minutes.
> Here's a summary of what was in the session's trace file:
> 
> Oracle Kernel Event  DurationCallsAvg
> 
> -- --  --
> SQL*Net message from client   984.01s   49.6%   95,161  0.010340s
> SQL*Net more data from client 418.82s   21.1%3,345  0.125208s
> db file sequential read   279.54s   14.1%   45,085  0.006200s
> CPU service   248.69s   12.5%  222,760  0.001116s
> unaccounted-for27.73s1.4%
> latch free 23.69s1.2%   34,695  0.000683s
> log file sync   1.09s0.1%  506  0.002154s
> SQL*Net more data to client 0.83s0.0%   15,982  0.52s
> log file switch completion  0.28s0.0%3  0.09s
> enqueue 0.25s0.0%  106  0.002358s
> SQL*Net message to client   0.24s0.0%   95,161  0.03s
> buffer busy waits   0.22s0.0%   67  0.003284s
> db file scattered read  0.01s0.0%2  0.005000s
> SQL*Net break/reset to client   0.00s0.0%2  0.00s
> -- --  --
> Total   1,985.40s  100.0%
> 
> Well, waits for "latch free" accounted for only 1.2% of the total
> response time. If the DBAs had been completely successful in
> eliminating
> "latch free" waits from their system, it would have made only a 1.2%
> difference in the runtime of this program. Point 1: This
> program's bottleneck is not the same as its system's system-wide
> average
> bottleneck. This happens all the time. You can NOT see
> this
> type of problem when you look only at system-wide average statistics.
> 
> You probably didn't pay much heed to the first thing you should have
> noticed: slightly more than 70% of this program's runtime was
> consumed
> by so-called "server idle" time. ??! You can't ignore this time, even
> if
> people do call it "idle." Idle or not, this time was part of
> someone's
> response time, so we need to deal with it. Now if we hadn't collected
> our statistics so carefully (with proper time scope and proper
> program
> scope), then we would have seen probably much more "SQL*Net message
> from
> client" time in our data. If you make that particular collection
> error,
> then you *have* to disregard the so-called "idle" wait time.
> 
> What was the Payroll program's problem? A couple of things. First, we
> knew that the Payroll program was running on the same host as Oracle.
> But the latency per call on the "SQL*Net message from client" event
> looked suspiciously LAN-like (order of 10ms), not IPC-like (order of
> 1ms
> or less). So we checked the tnsnames.ora file. Turns out that to
> conserve administration effort, the DBAs had decided to use a single
> tnsnames.ora file system-wide. So the Payroll program was using the
> same
> TCP/IP protocol that the system's PC clients were using. Just by
> switching the protocol to BEQ instead of TCP in the db server's
> tnsnames.ora file (a change that took about 15 minutes to test, 20
> seconds to implement, and about

Re: Wait event problems

2002-06-13 Thread Tim Gorman

This is never an "idle" event.  The phrase "more data from client" indicates
that the individual SQL operation is larger than a single SQL*Net packet.
No big deal;  it happens all the time, and SQL*Net handles it with
"continuation packets".  Only issue is that the client is taking a lot of
time between each packet sent.  Jack's conclusion that the client process
(in the "client-server" database connection) is not providing data in a
"timely fashion" is exactly correct.  You most likely have a slow client
process...

Oracle documentation frequently tries to encourage mucking about with
SDU/TDU parameters in SQL*Net configuration files, but I've rarely seen this
be more effective than tuning the client process...  :-)

- Original Message -
To: "Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2002 10:08 AM


> Lee,
>
> This is an idle wait event, meaning that the query
> process is waiting on instructions from the client.
>
> Usually this process is benign, but sometimes can
> indicate that the feeding process is not providing
> data in a timely fashion.
>
> hth,
>
> jack silvey
>
> --- Robertson Lee - lerobe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > All,
> >
> > Oracle 8.0.5.0.0
> > Tru64 v4.0f
> >
> > We are running a job and statspack reports show that
> > our only problem (it is
> > running like a dog) is the following
> >
> > SQL*Net more data from client.
> >
> > Done some reading and still none the wiser. Anyone
> > else had this sort of
> > problem and if so how did you get around it ??
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Lee
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > The information contained in this communication is
> > confidential, is intended only for the use of the
> > recipient
> > named above, and may be legally privileged. If the
> > reader
> > of this message is not the intended recipient, you
> > are
> > hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution
> > or
> > copying of this communication is strictly
> > prohibited.
> > If you have received this communication in error,
> > please
> > re-send this communication to the sender and delete
> > the
> > original message or any copy of it from your
> > computer
> > system.
> >
>
>
> __
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
> http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com
> --
> Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
> --
> Author: Jack Silvey
>   INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Fat City Network Services-- (858) 538-5051  FAX: (858) 538-5051
> San Diego, California-- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists
> 
> To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
> to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
> the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
> (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from).  You may
> also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).

-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
-- 
Author: Tim Gorman
  INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Fat City Network Services-- (858) 538-5051  FAX: (858) 538-5051
San Diego, California-- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists

To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
(or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from).  You may
also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).



RE: Wait event problems

2002-06-13 Thread Jesse, Rich

Hi Lee,

I'm investigating a very similar problem on 8.1.6.0.0 on Solaris.  So far,
I've found out that the 3rd-party vendor who setup this debacle had inserted
invalid values for SDU/TDU in tnsnames.ora on the client and listener.ora on
the server.  I'm correcting them now as we speak.  (Incidentally, Oracle
recommends NOT modifying TDU and gives no guidelines as to how to select a
value.)

Also, our clients are Java apps, which would be my guess as to the root of
the problem.  The clients just aren't fast enough to deal with the rather
large overhead of Java.  But I'm cautiously optimistic on the SDU/TDU fix...

And www.fatcity.com doesn't want to respond, so we'll have to wait a bit to
search the archives.

GL!

Rich Jesse   System/Database Administrator
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  Quad/Tech International, Sussex, WI USA


-Original Message-
Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2002 10:23 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L


All,
 
Oracle 8.0.5.0.0
Tru64 v4.0f
 
We are running a job and statspack reports show that our only problem (it is
running like a dog) is the following
 
SQL*Net more data from client.
 
Done some reading and still none the wiser. Anyone else had this sort of
problem and if so how did you get around it ??
 
Regards
 
Lee
-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
-- 
Author: Jesse, Rich
  INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Fat City Network Services-- (858) 538-5051  FAX: (858) 538-5051
San Diego, California-- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists

To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
(or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from).  You may
also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).



Re: Wait event problems

2002-06-13 Thread Mohammad Rafiq

I think Rachel is referring following email from Carry Millsap.. It is a 
really nice explanation of this issue
Regards
Rafiq



I have an example for you (Anjo, I hope you won't mind). A prospect we
visited once upon a time had been fighting a performance problem with an
Oracle Payroll program. They "knew" what their problem was: very
clearly, v$system_event was telling them that their overwhelmingly
dominant system performance problem was waits for "latch free." (Well,
no it wasn't. It was waits for the Oracle Payroll program. ;) )

Actually, the v$system_event view indicated clearly that the top wait
event was "SQL*Net message from client" (and some other "SQL*Net %"
stuff), but of course every good DBA knows that you have to discard all
the "SQL*Net" events because they are "idle" events.

Three months of trying and failing to fix the problem led finally to a
last-resort, desperation hardware upgrade. Twelve 700MHz CPUs became
twelve new 1,024MHz CPUs. (Don't ask why "waits for latch free" was
translated as "need to upgrade CPUs.") And unfortunately, the Payroll
program got *slower*. Not just "seemed slower"--*was* slower.

After the upgrade failed to help, these guys finally let us come see
them. We traced the Payroll process (10046, level 8), very carefully
initiating the trace immediately after the initiation of the Payroll
run, and very carefully terminating the trace immediately after the
completion of the Payroll run. The key here is that every second of data
in the trace file was a second of somebody's response time.

The result was a really fun story. The thing ran in about 33 minutes.
Here's a summary of what was in the session's trace file:

Oracle Kernel Event  DurationCallsAvg

-- --  --
SQL*Net message from client   984.01s   49.6%   95,161  0.010340s
SQL*Net more data from client 418.82s   21.1%3,345  0.125208s
db file sequential read   279.54s   14.1%   45,085  0.006200s
CPU service   248.69s   12.5%  222,760  0.001116s
unaccounted-for27.73s1.4%
latch free 23.69s1.2%   34,695  0.000683s
log file sync   1.09s0.1%  506  0.002154s
SQL*Net more data to client 0.83s0.0%   15,982  0.52s
log file switch completion  0.28s0.0%3  0.09s
enqueue 0.25s0.0%  106  0.002358s
SQL*Net message to client   0.24s0.0%   95,161  0.03s
buffer busy waits   0.22s0.0%   67  0.003284s
db file scattered read  0.01s0.0%2  0.005000s
SQL*Net break/reset to client   0.00s0.0%2  0.00s
-- --  --
Total   1,985.40s  100.0%

Well, waits for "latch free" accounted for only 1.2% of the total
response time. If the DBAs had been completely successful in eliminating
"latch free" waits from their system, it would have made only a 1.2%
difference in the runtime of this program. Point 1: This
program's bottleneck is not the same as its system's system-wide average
bottleneck. This happens all the time. You can NOT see this
type of problem when you look only at system-wide average statistics.

You probably didn't pay much heed to the first thing you should have
noticed: slightly more than 70% of this program's runtime was consumed
by so-called "server idle" time. ??! You can't ignore this time, even if
people do call it "idle." Idle or not, this time was part of someone's
response time, so we need to deal with it. Now if we hadn't collected
our statistics so carefully (with proper time scope and proper program
scope), then we would have seen probably much more "SQL*Net message from
client" time in our data. If you make that particular collection error,
then you *have* to disregard the so-called "idle" wait time.

What was the Payroll program's problem? A couple of things. First, we
knew that the Payroll program was running on the same host as Oracle.
But the latency per call on the "SQL*Net message from client" event
looked suspiciously LAN-like (order of 10ms), not IPC-like (order of 1ms
or less). So we checked the tnsnames.ora file. Turns out that to
conserve administration effort, the DBAs had decided to use a single
tnsnames.ora file system-wide. So the Payroll program was using the same
TCP/IP protocol that the system's PC clients were using. Just by
switching the protocol to BEQ instead of TCP in the db server's
tnsnames.ora file (a change that took about 15 minutes to test, 20
seconds to implement, and about a week to navigate through change
control), we eliminated about 50% of the program's runtime.

Next, what's with the "SQL*Net more data from client"? The developers of
this particular Payroll program did a pretty bad thing in their code:
they passed several really long (

RE: Wait event problems

2002-06-13 Thread Cary Millsap

"SQL*Net more data from client" is a probable indication that your
application is passing huge SQL statements from the client to the server
(very hard on your database performance for a number of reasons) instead
of calling stored procedures.

 
Cary Millsap
Hotsos Enterprises, Ltd.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.hotsos.com


-Original Message-
Lee - lerobe
Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2002 11:08 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L

Ha ha, not quite but I think I know where the problem may lie. It does a
lot
of OS file handling between inserts. 

Thanks for that

Lee


-Original Message-
Sent: 13 June 2002 16:44
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L



The database server is waiting for the client.
The client could be Oracle Reports --- thus you are running a report
which does some calculations in the report before executing the next
SELECT on the server.
Hemant

At 07:23 AM 13-06-02 -0800, you wrote:
>All,
>
>Oracle 8.0.5.0.0
>Tru64 v4.0f
>
>We are running a job and statspack reports show that our only problem
(it 
>is running like a dog) is the following
>
>SQL*Net more data from client.
>
>Done some reading and still none the wiser. Anyone else had this sort
of 
>problem and if so how did you get around it ??
>
>Regards
>
>Lee
>
>
>
>
>
>The information contained in this communication is
>confidential, is intended only for the use of the recipient
>named above, and may be legally privileged. If the reader
>of this message is not the intended recipient, you are
>hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or
>copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.
>If you have received this communication in error, please
>re-send this communication to the sender and delete the
>original message or any copy of it from your computer
>system.

-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
-- 
Author: Hemant K Chitale
  INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Fat City Network Services-- (858) 538-5051  FAX: (858) 538-5051
San Diego, California-- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists

To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
(or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from).  You may
also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).


The information contained in this communication is
confidential, is intended only for the use of the recipient
named above, and may be legally privileged. If the reader 
of this message is not the intended recipient, you are
hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or
copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.  
If you have received this communication in error, please 
re-send this communication to the sender and delete the 
original message or any copy of it from your computer
system.
-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
-- 
Author: Robertson Lee - lerobe
  INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Fat City Network Services-- (858) 538-5051  FAX: (858) 538-5051
San Diego, California-- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists

To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
(or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from).  You may
also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).

--
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
--
Author: Cary Millsap
  INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Fat City Network Services-- (858) 538-5051  FAX: (858) 538-5051
San Diego, California-- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists

To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
(or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from).  You may
also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).



Re: Wait event problems

2002-06-13 Thread Rachel Carmichael

You may want to search the archives of the list as well, I seem to
recall Cary Millsap posting something not too long ago where they found
that this "idle" wait event was a real problem.

If you can't find it, I can try to dig it out of my files

Rachel

--- Jack Silvey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Lee,
> 
> This is an idle wait event, meaning that the query
> process is waiting on instructions from the client. 
> 
> Usually this process is benign, but sometimes can
> indicate that the feeding process is not providing
> data in a timely fashion.
> 
> hth,
> 
> jack silvey
> 
> --- Robertson Lee - lerobe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > All,
> >  
> > Oracle 8.0.5.0.0
> > Tru64 v4.0f
> >  
> > We are running a job and statspack reports show that
> > our only problem (it is
> > running like a dog) is the following
> >  
> > SQL*Net more data from client.
> >  
> > Done some reading and still none the wiser. Anyone
> > else had this sort of
> > problem and if so how did you get around it ??
> >  
> > Regards
> >  
> > Lee
> >  
> >  
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > The information contained in this communication is
> > confidential, is intended only for the use of the
> > recipient
> > named above, and may be legally privileged. If the
> > reader 
> > of this message is not the intended recipient, you
> > are
> > hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution
> > or
> > copying of this communication is strictly
> > prohibited.  
> > If you have received this communication in error,
> > please 
> > re-send this communication to the sender and delete
> > the 
> > original message or any copy of it from your
> > computer
> > system.
> > 
> 
> 
> __
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
> http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com
> -- 
> Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
> -- 
> Author: Jack Silvey
>   INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> Fat City Network Services-- (858) 538-5051  FAX: (858) 538-5051
> San Diego, California-- Public Internet access / Mailing
> Lists
> 
> To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
> to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
> the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
> (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from).  You may
> also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).


__
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com
-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
-- 
Author: Rachel Carmichael
  INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Fat City Network Services-- (858) 538-5051  FAX: (858) 538-5051
San Diego, California-- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists

To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
(or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from).  You may
also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).



RE: Wait event problems

2002-06-13 Thread Robertson Lee - lerobe

Ha ha, not quite but I think I know where the problem may lie. It does a lot
of OS file handling between inserts. 

Thanks for that

Lee


-Original Message-
Sent: 13 June 2002 16:44
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L



The database server is waiting for the client.
The client could be Oracle Reports --- thus you are running a report
which does some calculations in the report before executing the next
SELECT on the server.
Hemant

At 07:23 AM 13-06-02 -0800, you wrote:
>All,
>
>Oracle 8.0.5.0.0
>Tru64 v4.0f
>
>We are running a job and statspack reports show that our only problem (it 
>is running like a dog) is the following
>
>SQL*Net more data from client.
>
>Done some reading and still none the wiser. Anyone else had this sort of 
>problem and if so how did you get around it ??
>
>Regards
>
>Lee
>
>
>
>
>
>The information contained in this communication is
>confidential, is intended only for the use of the recipient
>named above, and may be legally privileged. If the reader
>of this message is not the intended recipient, you are
>hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or
>copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.
>If you have received this communication in error, please
>re-send this communication to the sender and delete the
>original message or any copy of it from your computer
>system.

-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
-- 
Author: Hemant K Chitale
  INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Fat City Network Services-- (858) 538-5051  FAX: (858) 538-5051
San Diego, California-- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists

To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
(or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from).  You may
also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).


The information contained in this communication is
confidential, is intended only for the use of the recipient
named above, and may be legally privileged. If the reader 
of this message is not the intended recipient, you are
hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or
copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.  
If you have received this communication in error, please 
re-send this communication to the sender and delete the 
original message or any copy of it from your computer
system.
-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
-- 
Author: Robertson Lee - lerobe
  INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Fat City Network Services-- (858) 538-5051  FAX: (858) 538-5051
San Diego, California-- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists

To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
(or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from).  You may
also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).



Re: Wait event problems

2002-06-13 Thread Jack Silvey

Lee,

This is an idle wait event, meaning that the query
process is waiting on instructions from the client. 

Usually this process is benign, but sometimes can
indicate that the feeding process is not providing
data in a timely fashion.

hth,

jack silvey

--- Robertson Lee - lerobe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> All,
>  
> Oracle 8.0.5.0.0
> Tru64 v4.0f
>  
> We are running a job and statspack reports show that
> our only problem (it is
> running like a dog) is the following
>  
> SQL*Net more data from client.
>  
> Done some reading and still none the wiser. Anyone
> else had this sort of
> problem and if so how did you get around it ??
>  
> Regards
>  
> Lee
>  
>  
> 
> 
> 
> The information contained in this communication is
> confidential, is intended only for the use of the
> recipient
> named above, and may be legally privileged. If the
> reader 
> of this message is not the intended recipient, you
> are
> hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution
> or
> copying of this communication is strictly
> prohibited.  
> If you have received this communication in error,
> please 
> re-send this communication to the sender and delete
> the 
> original message or any copy of it from your
> computer
> system.
> 


__
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com
-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
-- 
Author: Jack Silvey
  INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Fat City Network Services-- (858) 538-5051  FAX: (858) 538-5051
San Diego, California-- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists

To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
(or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from).  You may
also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).



Re: Wait event problems

2002-06-13 Thread Hemant K Chitale


The database server is waiting for the client.
The client could be Oracle Reports --- thus you are running a report
which does some calculations in the report before executing the next
SELECT on the server.
Hemant

At 07:23 AM 13-06-02 -0800, you wrote:
>All,
>
>Oracle 8.0.5.0.0
>Tru64 v4.0f
>
>We are running a job and statspack reports show that our only problem (it 
>is running like a dog) is the following
>
>SQL*Net more data from client.
>
>Done some reading and still none the wiser. Anyone else had this sort of 
>problem and if so how did you get around it ??
>
>Regards
>
>Lee
>
>
>
>
>
>The information contained in this communication is
>confidential, is intended only for the use of the recipient
>named above, and may be legally privileged. If the reader
>of this message is not the intended recipient, you are
>hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or
>copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.
>If you have received this communication in error, please
>re-send this communication to the sender and delete the
>original message or any copy of it from your computer
>system.

-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
-- 
Author: Hemant K Chitale
  INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Fat City Network Services-- (858) 538-5051  FAX: (858) 538-5051
San Diego, California-- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists

To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
(or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from).  You may
also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).



Wait event problems

2002-06-13 Thread Robertson Lee - lerobe



All,
 
Oracle 
8.0.5.0.0
Tru64 
v4.0f
 
We are running a job 
and statspack reports show that our only problem (it is running like a dog) is 
the following
 
SQL*Net more data from 
client.
 
Done some reading 
and still none the wiser. Anyone else had this sort of problem and if so how did 
you get around it ??
 
Regards
 
Lee
 
 


The information contained in this communication is
confidential, is intended only for the use of the recipient
named above, and may be legally privileged. If the reader 
of this message is not the intended recipient, you are
hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or
copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.  
If you have received this communication in error, please 
re-send this communication to the sender and delete the 
original message or any copy of it from your computer
system.