Re: Library lock issue

_at_Laurentiu

As I mentioned above it was a kind of bug or kind of “we don’t know why when using bind variable PX slaves were refusing to share the execution plan of their QC”. I have had an excellent private discussion with Oracle support engineer about this issue and he clearly explained that this was reported to the CBO team.

So, I am sorry I haven’t any bug to share with you for this issue. Moreover, it happened in 12cR1 and, as I said above, I still have not encountered a similar issue in 12cR2, 18c, and 19c where I am using parallelism extensively

_at_Pap

My answer was that, *probably*, your parallel parsing issue is due to the usage of GTT private statistics. So if your planned fix tentative will reveal to be useless, I would then suggest checking if using GTT shared statistics will get rid of the library cache lock and cursor pin S wait on x wait events. If so then you have to balance between sharing inadequate GTT statistics and parsing effects.

*“All things being equal you must balance between the performance improvement brought by this new GTT feature and the parsing side effect it introduces because of the underlying cursor invalidation. In my client case,** the Library cache and Cursor Pin S wait on X wait events introduced by the SESSION PRIVATE statistics largely outweigh the performance penalty that comes when the 49 streams share the same GTT statistics.”*

Best regards

Mohamed Houri

Le mar. 2 févr. 2021 à 11:10, Laurentiu Oprea <laurentiu.oprea06_at_gmail.com> a écrit :

> Hello Pap,
>
> I was mentioning DS in the context of possible bug as well. If L2 is used
> most probably you don't have an issue around this and your issue might be
> around GTTs stats.
>
> În mar., 2 feb. 2021 la 11:57, Pap <oracle.developer35_at_gmail.com> a scris:
>
>> Thanks much.
>>
>> For that query , I see the below note section. And as i mentioned are
>> using private session level stats collected for two of the global temporary
>> tables but one global temp table is having null stats and so perhaps for
>> that the dynamic sampling is triggered. In our case we are not using bind
>> variables in this query but literals. But anyway , I am planning to set the
>> paralle_force_local to TRUE in the session level and along with that we
>> will collect the stats on all the three tables setting all of them to use
>> private session level stats , hopefully that will also make optimizer get
>> rid of the dynamic sampling part.
>>
>> We can't set the dynamic sampling level to zero for this query because we
>> are many times getting a bad execution path and to help fix that we need
>> accurate stats , so I think private session level stats for all three
>> tables is the one to go for in our case. Correct me if wrong.
>>
>> Also can you please share the exact bug which you are talking of.
>>
>>
>> Note
>>
>> -----
>>
>> - dynamic statistics used: dynamic sampling (level=2)
>>
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Pap
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 2, 2021 at 2:32 PM Mohamed Houri <mohamed.houri_at_gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I have faced a similar 12cR1 issue of parallel slave (PX) refusing to
>>> share the execution plan of their query coordinator (QC) despite both QC
>>> and its PX slaves were in the same instance. It turned to be a kind of bug
>>> because of the usage of bind variable (yes using bind variables !!) and
>>> dynamic sampling.
>>>
>>> But here you are using literals and GTT with private statistics. Bear
>>> in mind that when you are using session private statistics Oracle will not
>>> propagate GTT private statistics from one session to another one. It
>>> achieves this by invalidating similar cursor between sessions.
>>>
>>>
>>> https://hourim.wordpress.com/2019/07/30/global-temporary-table-private-statistic
>>> <https://hourim.wordpress.com/2019/07/30/global-temporary-table-private-statistics/>
>>>
>>>
>>> That’s said I haven’t tested how Oracle will consider the QC coordinator
>>> session per regards to its PX slave sessions in case of private GTT
>>> sessions.
>>>
>>> You can see if your execution plan has the following Note signaling that
>>> it has used a GTT private statistics or not
>>>
>>> Note
>>>
>>> -----
>>>
>>> -- Global temporary table session private statistics used
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> And use Tanel Poder nonshared sql script to get the reason for which PX
>>> slaves are refusing the share the execution plan of their QC
>>>
>>>
>>> Best Regards
>>>
>>> Mohamed Houri
>>>
>>> Le mar. 2 févr. 2021 à 09:42, Chinar Aliyev <chinaraliyev_at_gmail.com> a
>>> écrit :
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>> There are several bugs in Oracle Support and might one of them be
>>>> appropriate for your case.
>>>>
>>>> It happens when QC and PX Slaves are allocated in different instances,
>>>> and a remote slave has to parse the statement based on the info sent by
>>>> QC (to achieve the same execution plan generated by QC).
>>>> To reduce parsing you can force it as Sayan has mentioned. Also, check
>>>> support notes/bugs.
>>>>
>>>> Best Regards
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Feb 2, 2021 at 11:12 AM Pap <oracle.developer35_at_gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Thanks a lot.
>>>>>
>>>>> We will definitely try rerunning by setting session level
>>>>> "parallel_force_local" parameter to true as we set this value as 'FALSE' in
>>>>> v$parameter.
>>>>>
>>>>> *"parallel slaves will not be able to join the execution because they
>>>>> are not able to reproduce the same execution plan as the coordinator. "*
>>>>>
>>>>> I am a bit confused with above statement on the dynamic sampling part,
>>>>> I see out of three global temporary tables used in this query , two of them
>>>>> are using private session level stats as it's gathered inside the code. But
>>>>> one(RTNI) is having stats set as NULL and also its locked , which means the
>>>>> dynamic sampling must have been triggered for that table only. But in that
>>>>> case too, i am not able to understand how the dynamic sampling can be the
>>>>> cause, can you please explain bit more. As because , my understanding is
>>>>> parsing will happen at the first stage and till that time parallel slaves
>>>>> wont get involve in real execution. So as the table related info will be
>>>>> available in the node-3 as that being the session of the query
>>>>> coordinator/parent session , so that should only do the parsing work.
>>>>> Please correct me if wrong.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards
>>>>> Pap
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Feb 2, 2021 at 11:20 AM Laurentiu Oprea <
>>>>> laurentiu.oprea06_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Additional to what has been mentioned, usually this issue is
>>>>>> caused by the fact that parallel slaves will not be able to join the
>>>>>> execution because they are not able to reproduce the same execution plan as
>>>>>> the coordinator.
>>>>>> Dynamic Sampling is often one of the root causes for this issue, If
>>>>>> DS is not helping in your case you can create a spl patch for that sql with
>>>>>> a lower level of DS or even disable it : dynamic_sampling(0).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Good luck
>>>>>>
>>>>>> În lun., 1 feb. 2021 la 23:53, Sayan Malakshinov <xt.and.r_at_gmail.com>
>>>>>> a scris:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Pap,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Have you tried to set parallel_force_local=true? Your QC is on Node
>>>>>>> 3 while your slaves are on Node 2:
>>>>>>> 1. Parallel queries usually work much better if they don't need to
>>>>>>> send data between nodes and fight for concurrent access to the same data;
>>>>>>> 2. You are using global temporary tables, so their data is private
>>>>>>> for your session and stored on the same node as your session. In case of
>>>>>>> parallel access to GTT, QC has to send also their segment info, so your
>>>>>>> slaves have to request data from it, ie from Node 3.
>>>>>>> 3. Also that means that node 2 have to parse your query too for your
>>>>>>> slaves (sometimes it even leads to more child cursors)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 1, 2021 at 10:28 PM Pap <oracle.developer35_at_gmail.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hello All, We are seeing some odd behaviour. Its version 12.1.0.2.0
>>>>>>>> of oracle. And a small query(finishing in <1 minutes) which is executing in
>>>>>>>> parallel(2) is experiencing "library cache lock" and "cursor: pin S wait on
>>>>>>>> X" between its own slaves. I mean to say the blocking session is appearing
>>>>>>>> as its own slave sessions. We have "parallel_degree_policy" set as MANUAL
>>>>>>>> in v$parametr. This query is running for different literals one after
>>>>>>>> another multiple times in a loop fashion. And all these samples logged in
>>>>>>>> dba_hist_active_sess_history showing IN_PARSE as 'Y'. Dueto these waits the
>>>>>>>> overall execution time of the process is going beyond ~5hrs+. The CPU and
>>>>>>>> IO waits as noted in sql monitor is very small. Wondering how parallel
>>>>>>>> slave processes of the same query are blocking each other during parsing
>>>>>>>> itself. Or are we hitting any bug in this version?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Attached is the sql and its run time sql monitor. And all the
>>>>>>>> tables used in this query are global temporary tables "on commit preserve
>>>>>>>> row" types.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks And Regards
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Pap
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>> Sayan Malakshinov
>>>>>>> Oracle performance tuning engineer
>>>>>>> Oracle ACE Associate
>>>>>>> http://orasql.org
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> *Chinar Aliyev*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Visit My :Blog <http://chinaraliyev.wordpress.com/>
>>>> Let's Connect - <http://fr.linkedin.com/pub/mohamed-houri/11/329/857/>*Linkedin
>>>> Profile <https://www.linkedin.com/in/chinaraliyev/>*
>>>>
>>>> My Twitter <https://twitter.com/MohamedHouri> - ChinarAliyev
>>>> <https://twitter.com/ChinarAliyev>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Houri Mohamed
>>>
>>> Oracle DBA-Developer-Performance & Tuning
>>>
>>> Visit My - Blog <http://www.hourim.wordpress.com/>
>>>
>>> Let's Connect - <http://fr.linkedin.com/pub/mohamed-houri/11/329/857/>*Linkedin
>>> Profile <http://fr.linkedin.com/pub/mohamed-houri/11/329/857/>*
>>>
>>> My Twitter <https://twitter.com/MohamedHouri> - MohamedHouri
>>> <https://twitter.com/MohamedHouri>
>>>
>>>

-- 

Houri Mohamed

Oracle DBA-Developer-Performance & Tuning

Visit My         - Blog <http://www.hourim.wordpress.com/>

Let's Connect -
<http://fr.linkedin.com/pub/mohamed-houri/11/329/857/>*Linkedin
Profile <http://fr.linkedin.com/pub/mohamed-houri/11/329/857/>*

My Twitter <https://twitter.com/MohamedHouri>      - MohamedHouri
<https://twitter.com/MohamedHouri>


--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l