Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid |
Home -> Community -> Mailing Lists -> Oracle-L -> Re: Same operation, more CPU time
I think if you had to do more work in creating read consistent blocks, the trace file would show the access to the undo blocks as part of the "query" column, which you would have noticed.
If you are busy updating, then perhaps you have
extra competition for latches, so you may be
expending extra CPU spinning for latches, and
being pushed off the run queue etc. Whilst the
apparent difference in time might then seem
unreasonable for the likely effects, it is possible
that the actual difference in time is small, but the
increment is enough to allow what Cary calls
(something like) "quantization" errors to become
exaggerated.
You may also have effects like processes yielding, but staying runnable when not competing, whereas they may have to sleep when competing - and this could affect the CPU - please note that I am hand-waving and mumbling when I say this.
Regards
Jonathan Lewis
http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/faq/ind_faq.html The Co-operative Oracle Users' FAQ
http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/seminar.html Optimising Oracle Seminar - schedule updated May 1st
Hi all.
I'm doing some performance testing--the purpose is to see how the response time of our interactive Web application changes when a batch-mode data load process runs concurrently.
The response time of the GUI does increase. A 10046 trace does not
show significant additional wait events that account for the extra
time--instead, it appears that CPU usage for the same operations
increases. For example, in the GUI test with nothing else running, a
particular query might take .03 seconds of CPU per row; with the data
load running, the same query might take .055 seconds. The optimizer
plan lines in the tkprof output show greater CPU time for each step
(e.g., block gets via rowid, hash join, etc.). I emphasize that the
difference is in CPU consumption, not just elapsed time--again, there
is no significant different in wait time between the two executions.
Also, the database server's overall CPU usage never exceeded 46% during
the tests.
-- Archives are at http://www.freelists.org/archives/oracle-l/ FAQ is at http://www.freelists.org/help/fom-serve/cache/1.html -----------------------------------------------------------------Received on Wed May 05 2004 - 17:04:26 CDT