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: Performance

Re: Performance

From: Lucas <Lucas_44_at_hotmail.com>
Date: Mon, 09 Sep 2002 18:25:29 GMT
Message-ID: <tI5f9.10234$_J3.426166@news0.telusplanet.net>

Yes with the Plus test scrolling across the screen, that's what it was. I'm not complaining that it is slow, I'm just checking if there are ways to optimize or if this is the normal response time. Retreiving that many records is
not the norm but it can happen. Even with 3000 or so, it is slow...again, not the norm but if the user wants to see all 3000 on the screen, up to him/her. No, I haven't tried anything yet, just started looking at it. What about storage parameters? Just looking for some suggestions on where to start to possibly improve speed.

"Ed Stevens" <spamdump_at_nospam.noway.nohow> wrote in message news:3d7cddb3.21695256_at_ausnews.austin.ibm.com...
> So, is it taking a minute for Oracle to return a result set, or is it
 taking a
> minute for Plus to scroll 17,000 rows across you screen? What are you
 really
> measureing, and how are you measuring it? Have you tried an explain plan?
 A
> trace? A TKPROF?
>
> On Mon, 09 Sep 2002 16:53:45 GMT, "Lucas" <Lucas_44_at_hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Ok, I was a little vague.
> >Win2000
> >P3 900 mhz
> >384 RAM
> >Oracle 8 , testing on local machine only, not even on server with
 concurent
> >users.
> >
> >I'm trying to optimize our db, I'm testing our SQL calls and seeing if
> >indexing would help speed up the program. We can retreive records from
> >different
> >levels in the program, the higher the level the more records. I tried a
> >straight call (select * from table), it has 60 fields, 17,000 recs and it
> >took close to 1 min
> >to get all the rows. This is from SQL*Plus, so obviously in a program
 with
> >user interface, getting all the record plus all the lookups makes it ever
> >slower. The fields
> >are basic varchars, integers, couple of varchar2(255), 1 longraw with
 hardly
> >any images in it.
> >
> >Lucas
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >"Michael J. Moore" <hicamel_x_the_spam_at_attbi.com> wrote in message
> >news:u04f9.259894$aA.44922_at_sccrnsc02...
> >> With the small amount of information you have given, I'd say that
 generally
> >> you are right, that's pretty darn slow.
> >> But if you are running on Win95, with 500 concurrent users, and your
 columns
> >> are imbedded tables or clobs,
> >> maybe that is totally reasonable. You really need to give a lot more
> >> information for anybody to make the kind of assessment you are looking
 for.
> >>
> >> "Lucas" <Lucas_44_at_hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >> news:bV3f9.10197$_J3.409715_at_news0.telusplanet.net...
> >> > With just a basic (select * from ATable ) that has 60 fields and
 17,000
> >> > records it takes close to 1 min to retrieve all the row, seems slow
 to
 me?
> >> > Or am I expecting too much?
> >> >
> >> > Lucas
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
> --
> Ed Stevens
> (Opinions expressed do not necessarily represent those of my employer.)
Received on Mon Sep 09 2002 - 13:25:29 CDT

Original text of this message

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