Re: Timestamp in the trace files
From: Steve Howard <stevedhoward_at_gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2010 13:51:37 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <8fb68a53-de09-48d4-8539-79abddc72882_at_g18g2000vbr.googlegroups.com>
On Jan 6, 4:46 pm, Steve Howard <stevedhow..._at_gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 6, 3:10 pm, Maxim Demenko <mdeme..._at_gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 06.01.2010 21:02, Maxim Demenko wrote:
>
> > > On 06.01.2010 20:27, Mladen Gogala wrote:
> > >> On Wed, 06 Jan 2010 19:37:14 +0100, Maxim Demenko wrote:
>
> > >>> On 06.01.2010 19:02, Mladen Gogala wrote:
> > >>>> On Wed, 06 Jan 2010 17:40:43 +0000, Mladen Gogala wrote:
>
> > >>>>> I am analyzing a trace file and the developer asked me when has this
> > >>>>> event taken place:
>
> > >>>>> =====================
> > >>>>> PARSING IN CURSOR #3 len=159 dep=0 uid=141 oct=3 lid=141
> > >>>>> tim=1233122414291746 hv=3402358638 ad='9a174550' select
> > >>>>> folderarti0_.segment# as col_0_0_, folderarti0_.FOLDER# as col_1_0_
> > >>>>> from FOLDER_ARTICLES folderarti0_ where folderarti0_.segment# in (:1 ,
> > >>>>> :2 , :3 , :4)
> > >>>>> END OF STMT
>
> > >> This is not really helpful. The application has run on 05-Jan-2009. Here
> > >> is what I get when I try using "seconds from 1970":
> > >> The result is January 28th, 2009, which is almost a year off.
>
> > > DATE'1970-01-01'+(1
> > > -------------------
> > > 05.01.2010 18:49:12
>
> > > Best regards
>
> > > Maxim
>
> > Sorry, of course, i am interpreting your words like it better suit my
> > needs ;-)
> > But either your meant to say "The application has run on 05-Jan-2010" -
> > in that case my previous post still applies, or it run indeed on
> > 05-Jan-2009 and my math is wrong, but then it is unclear with "The
> > result is January 28th, 2009, which is almost a year off".
>
> > Best regards
>
> > Maxim
>
> It doesn't work for me either...
>
> SQL> !date
> Wed Jan 6 16:44:47 EST 2010
>
> SQL> alter session set events '10046 trace name context forever, level
> 1';
>
> Session altered.
>
> SQL> select 1 from dual;
>
> 1
> ----------
> 1
>
> SQL> !ls -lrt | tail -1
> -rw-r----- 1 oracle dba 1923 2010-01-06 16:45 wcasprod_ora_3974.trc
>
> SQL> !grep PARSE wcasprod_ora_3974.trc
> PARSE
> #3:c=0,e=34,p=0,cr=0,cu=0,mis=0,r=0,dep=0,og=1,tim=1233217089752915
> PARSE
> #2:c=0,e=1029,p=0,cr=0,cu=0,mis=1,r=0,dep=0,og=1,tim=1233217094339231
> PARSE
> #3:c=0,e=39,p=0,cr=0,cu=0,mis=0,r=0,dep=0,og=1,tim=1233217094340214
>
> SQL> select to_date('1970-01-01','YYYY-MM-DD') + (&1/1000000) / 86400
> from dual
> 2 /
> Enter value for 1: 1233217089752915
>
> TO_DATE('1970-01-01','YYYY-MM
> -----------------------------
> 29-JAN-2009 08:18:10
>
> SQL>
I think I found the discrepancy, the 1024 mackes the difference.
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2010 13:51:37 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <8fb68a53-de09-48d4-8539-79abddc72882_at_g18g2000vbr.googlegroups.com>
On Jan 6, 4:46 pm, Steve Howard <stevedhow..._at_gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 6, 3:10 pm, Maxim Demenko <mdeme..._at_gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 06.01.2010 21:02, Maxim Demenko wrote:
>
> > > On 06.01.2010 20:27, Mladen Gogala wrote:
> > >> On Wed, 06 Jan 2010 19:37:14 +0100, Maxim Demenko wrote:
>
> > >>> On 06.01.2010 19:02, Mladen Gogala wrote:
> > >>>> On Wed, 06 Jan 2010 17:40:43 +0000, Mladen Gogala wrote:
>
> > >>>>> I am analyzing a trace file and the developer asked me when has this
> > >>>>> event taken place:
>
> > >>>>> =====================
> > >>>>> PARSING IN CURSOR #3 len=159 dep=0 uid=141 oct=3 lid=141
> > >>>>> tim=1233122414291746 hv=3402358638 ad='9a174550' select
> > >>>>> folderarti0_.segment# as col_0_0_, folderarti0_.FOLDER# as col_1_0_
> > >>>>> from FOLDER_ARTICLES folderarti0_ where folderarti0_.segment# in (:1 ,
> > >>>>> :2 , :3 , :4)
> > >>>>> END OF STMT
>
> > >> This is not really helpful. The application has run on 05-Jan-2009. Here
> > >> is what I get when I try using "seconds from 1970":
> > >> The result is January 28th, 2009, which is almost a year off.
>
> > > DATE'1970-01-01'+(1
> > > -------------------
> > > 05.01.2010 18:49:12
>
> > > Best regards
>
> > > Maxim
>
> > Sorry, of course, i am interpreting your words like it better suit my
> > needs ;-)
> > But either your meant to say "The application has run on 05-Jan-2010" -
> > in that case my previous post still applies, or it run indeed on
> > 05-Jan-2009 and my math is wrong, but then it is unclear with "The
> > result is January 28th, 2009, which is almost a year off".
>
> > Best regards
>
> > Maxim
>
> It doesn't work for me either...
>
> SQL> !date
> Wed Jan 6 16:44:47 EST 2010
>
> SQL> alter session set events '10046 trace name context forever, level
> 1';
>
> Session altered.
>
> SQL> select 1 from dual;
>
> 1
> ----------
> 1
>
> SQL> !ls -lrt | tail -1
> -rw-r----- 1 oracle dba 1923 2010-01-06 16:45 wcasprod_ora_3974.trc
>
> SQL> !grep PARSE wcasprod_ora_3974.trc
> PARSE
> #3:c=0,e=34,p=0,cr=0,cu=0,mis=0,r=0,dep=0,og=1,tim=1233217089752915
> PARSE
> #2:c=0,e=1029,p=0,cr=0,cu=0,mis=1,r=0,dep=0,og=1,tim=1233217094339231
> PARSE
> #3:c=0,e=39,p=0,cr=0,cu=0,mis=0,r=0,dep=0,og=1,tim=1233217094340214
>
> SQL> select to_date('1970-01-01','YYYY-MM-DD') + (&1/1000000) / 86400
> from dual
> 2 /
> Enter value for 1: 1233217089752915
>
> TO_DATE('1970-01-01','YYYY-MM
> -----------------------------
> 29-JAN-2009 08:18:10
>
> SQL>
I think I found the discrepancy, the 1024 mackes the difference.
If this is true, then the time is not truly quoted in microseconds (as Oracle documents it) in the trace file? Received on Wed Jan 06 2010 - 15:51:37 CST