Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid
HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US
 

Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.server -> Re: Getting results from oracle query suck!

Re: Getting results from oracle query suck!

From: Sybrand Bakker <postbus_at_sybrandb.demon.nl>
Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 19:06:08 +0200
Message-ID: <925837438.21998.0.muttley.d4ee154e@news.demon.nl>


Most likely this is a sql statement tuning issue. We need to have your statement and details about the tables. Then: are you using array fetching. This is possible in Pro*C and without doubt it is possible in OCI. Fetching a record is the costly operation there is. Fetch your records in batches of 100 or even 1000. Also makes sure Oracle traces this session. This will provide useful detail from the server side. Make sure sql_trace = true and timed_statistics = true in init<sid>.ora, bounce the database and see what happens

Hth,

Sybrand Bakker, Oracle DBA

MScheuter wrote in message <7gn1s6$rho6_at_amber.alltel.com>...
>I have a table that contains customer name information (about 10 fields).
>There are about 1.9 million rows in the table. The table is index by the
>last name. I am writing application code in both C++ using oracle oci and
>java using again the supplied oracle oci drivers (see oracle web site). In
>a test program I am timing the execution of the select statment and then
>timing how long it takes to 'read' (or drain) the rows of data from the
>database. The timing results are as follows:
>
>Rows in Result Set Query Time (ms) Read results time (ms)
>2824 187 11875
>211 156 969
>1330 187 4984
>1740 78 6062
>
>The test program was run on both a workstation using net8 and locally on
the
>server that is running the database using a local connection (no network
>involved) and the results were similiar.
>
>The server is a 2 way 200 mhz intell box with 512 meg ram 80 gig hd space.
>Can someone please explain some areas that I can look at in order to
improve
>the performance of reading the result set?
>
>Thanks
>-mike
>
>
Received on Tue May 04 1999 - 12:06:08 CDT

Original text of this message

HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US