From oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org Thu Mar 11 15:19:01 2004 Return-Path: Received: from air189.startdedicated.com (root@localhost) by orafaq.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i2BLJ1P19327 for ; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 15:19:01 -0600 X-ClientAddr: 206.53.239.180 Received: from turing.freelists.org (freelists-180.iquest.net [206.53.239.180]) by air189.startdedicated.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i2BLIwo19307 for ; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 15:18:58 -0600 Received: from turing (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with ESMTP id 490CD39C8EE; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 15:51:47 -0500 (EST) Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list oracle-l); Thu, 11 Mar 2004 15:50:33 -0500 (EST) X-Original-To: oracle-l@freelists.org Delivered-To: oracle-l@freelists.org Received: from web41304.mail.yahoo.com (web41304.mail.yahoo.com [66.218.93.53]) by turing.freelists.org (Avenir Technologies Mail Multiplex) with SMTP id A4831397C25 for ; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 14:24:32 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <20040311192936.98179.qmail@web41304.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [55.190.254.10] by web41304.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 11:29:36 PST Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 11:29:36 -0800 (PST) From: mkb Subject: Another Trace File Question To: oracle-l@freelists.org In-Reply-To: <20040311141548.GA1666@mladen.wangtrading.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-archive-position: 545 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org Errors-To: oracle-l-bounce@freelists.org X-original-sender: mkb125@yahoo.com Precedence: normal Reply-To: oracle-l@freelists.org X-list: oracle-l Hi folks, Got another trace file question. This is a snippet from a 10046 level 8 trace. I'm trying to interpret it and these are my conclusions: cursor #1 execs procedure in a package (dep=0) cursor #2 is a dependent of cursor #1 and execs a select statment (dep=1) cursor #3 execs a select statment that is a dependent of cursor #2 and ultimately of cursor #1 (dep=2) Are the above assumptions correct? Now I look at this line: ---> cut and pasted from below EXEC #1:c=62500,e=59627,p=0,cr=3,cu=0,mis=0,r=1,dep=0,og=4,t The e=59627 is the time (in micro secs) it took to execute all the statements (sum of all c and sum of all ela for #1 excluding #2 and #3 to avoid double counting). Is this assumption correct.....? ....or way off? mohammed =========================================== TRACE FILE SNIPPET =========================================== ===================== PARSING IN CURSOR #1 len=76 dep=0 uid=59 oct=47 lid=59 tim=18446744073012048559 hv=3247163232 ad='240ed360' Begin utils.s_item_type(:RESULT,:p_errorcode,:p_errorstr); End; END OF STMT PARSE #1:c=0,e=164,p=0,cr=0,cu=0,mis=0,r=0,dep=0,og=4,tim=18446744073012048553 ===================== PARSING IN CURSOR #4 len=48 dep=2 uid=0 oct=3 lid=0 tim=18446744073012063958 hv=3997906522 ad='21cb61dc' select user# from sys.user$ where name = 'OUTLN' END OF STMT PARSE #4:c=0,e=45,p=0,cr=0,cu=0,mis=0,r=0,dep=2,og=4,tim=18446744073012063949 EXEC #4:c=0,e=52,p=0,cr=0,cu=0,mis=0,r=0,dep=2,og=4,tim=18446744073012079540 FETCH #4:c=0,e=61,p=0,cr=3,cu=0,mis=0,r=1,dep=2,og=4,tim=18446744073012082821 STAT #4 id=1 cnt=1 pid=0 pos=1 obj=22 op='TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID USER$ (cr=3 r=0 w=0 time=45 us)' STAT #4 id=2 cnt=1 pid=1 pos=1 obj=44 op='INDEX UNIQUE SCAN I_USER1 (cr=2 r=0 w=0 time=28 us)' ===================== PARSING IN CURSOR #3 len=137 dep=1 uid=59 oct=3 lid=59 tim=18446744073012092872 hv=1460290276 ad='2253ed20' SELECT TYPE.type_cd, TYPE.type_cd FROM TYPE END OF STMT PARSE #3:c=15625,e=29049,p=0,cr=3,cu=0,mis=0,r=0,dep=1,og=4,tim=18446744073012092862 EXEC #3:c=0,e=60,p=0,cr=0,cu=0,mis=0,r=0,dep=1,og=4,tim=18446744073012116125 WAIT #1: nam='SQL*Net message to client' ela= 6 p1=1413697536 p2=1 p3=0 ---> cut and pasted above EXEC #1:c=62500,e=59627,p=0,cr=3,cu=0,mis=0,r=1,dep=0,og=4,tim=18446744073012123170 XCTEND rlbk=0, rd_only=1 WAIT #1: nam='SQL*Net message from client' ela= 822 p1=1413697536 p2=1 p3=0 WAIT #3: nam='SQL*Net message to client' ela= 4 p1=1413697536 p2=1 p3=0 FETCH #3:c=0,e=4133,p=0,cr=1,cu=0,mis=0,r=3,dep=0,og=4,tim=18446744073012140381 Dump file d:\oracle\admin\testdb\udump\testdb_ora_4992.trc Thu Mar 11 12:15:48 2004 ORACLE V9.2.0.4.0 - Production vsnsta=0 vsnsql=12 vsnxtr=3 Windows 2000 Version 5.0 Service Pack 4, CPU type 586 Oracle9i Enterprise Edition Release 9.2.0.4.0 - __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what you’re looking for faster http://search.yahoo.com ---------------------------------------------------------------- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com ---------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe send email to: oracle-l-request@freelists.org put 'unsubscribe' in the subject line. -- Archives are at http://www.freelists.org/archives/oracle-l/ FAQ is at http://www.freelists.org/help/fom-serve/cache/1.html -----------------------------------------------------------------