Search Results

Search found 544 results on 22 pages for 'clustered'.

Page 7/22 | < Previous Page | 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14  | Next Page >

  • New Versions of Whitepapers are available

    - by Anthony Shorten
    The set of whitepapers that are available are progressively being updated and republished to reflect new versions of the products as well new advice for existing customers. A number of whitepapers are now available that have been updated (the My Oracle Support Doc Id is indicated): What’s New in Oracle Utilities Application Framework V4 (Doc Id: 1177265.1) -  This has been updated for the latest facilities in Oracle Utilities Application Framework V4.1. Batch Best Practices (Doc Id: 836362.1) – This has been updated for newer advice including more details of how CLUSTERED mode works, how to migrate to CLUSTERED mode and some configuration examples to cover typical configuration scenarios. Oracle Utilities Application Framework Architecture Guidelines (Doc Id: 807068.1) – This has been updated to reflect additional architecture advice. Performance Troubleshooting Guides (Doc Id: 560382.1) – This has been updated for the latest facilities in Oracle Utilities Application Framework V4.1 and includes additional techniques that have been used by customers to track performance. The whitepapers apply to all Oracle Utilities Application Framework Products which at the present time includes: Oracle Utilities Customer Care And Billing (V2.x) Oracle Enterprise Taxation Management (V2.x) Oracle Utilities Business Intelligence (V2.x) Oracle Utilities Meter Data Management (V2.x) Oracle Utilities Mobile Workforce Management (V2.x) Oracle Utilities Smart Grid Gateway (V2.x) Additional whitepapers and updates will be posted as they are available.

    Read the article

  • Disabling certain JBoss ports

    - by Rich
    We are trying to configure JBoss 5.1.0 to be as lightweight and as secure as possible. One of the parts of this process is to identify and close any ports we do not need. Three ports that we have outstanding but don't believe we need are: 4457 - bisocket 4712 - JBossTS Recovery Manager 4713 - JBossTS Transaction Status Manager We don't think we need any of these features (but could be wrong). Bisocket seems to be a way for JMS clients behind a firewall to communicate with JBoss. We hardly use JMS now and when we do, it is very unlikely that we will need this firewall traversing ability. I am less sure about whether we need the two JBossTS ports - I am guessing these are used in a clustered environment - we aren't clustered. So my question is, how do we disable these ports (and associated processes where possible), or if we need these ports, why do we need to keep them open?

    Read the article

  • Removing offline/defunct files in SQL server 2008

    - by philox
    How to remove traces of files marked as OFFLINE or DEFUNCT in Microsoft SQL server 2008? I have been playing around with a setup where I create a database with 3 file-groups which are: Primary, FileGroupData and FileGroupIndex. The clustered index is using FileGroupData and a non-clustered index is set to use FileGroupIndex. To simulate a disk failure I've shut down SQL server and manually deleted the files in index file-group. To start the database I'll mark the files 'OFFLINE', but after that I can't delete the index files, which are now offline. I don't have backup of the files as they are merely indices, but that has the implication that I can't restore the files and have their status as "ONLINE". How would you recommend removing the files and the file-group as they still show up in management studio under files/file-groups. Management studio is not able to delete them. As far as I can tell this is different from the question posted in : http://stackoverflow.com/questions/462637/how-do-i-remove-offline-files-from-a-sql-server-2005-database /Philip

    Read the article

  • Isn't INT more efficient than UNIQUEIDENTIFIER?

    - by ck
    I have a parent table and child table where the columns that join them together are the UNIQUEIDENTIFIER type. The child table has a clustered index on the column that joins it to the parent table (its PK, which is also clustered). I have created a copy of both of these tables but changed the relationship columns to be INTs instead, have rebuilt the indexes so that they are essentially the same structure and can be queried in the same way. When I query for a known 20 records from the parent table, pulling in all the related records from the child tables, I get identical query costs across both, i.e. 50/50 cost for the batches. If this is true, then my giant project to change all of the tables like this appears to be pointless, other than speeding up inserts. Can anyone provide any light on the situation?

    Read the article

  • SQL Server Table Partitioning, what is happening behind the scenes?

    - by user404463
    I'm working with table partitioning on extremely large fact table in a warehouse. I have executed the script a few different ways. With and without non clustered indexes. With indexes it appears to dramatically expand the log file while without the non clustered indexes it appears to not expand the log file as much but takes more time to run due to the rebuilding of the indexes. What I am looking for is any links or information as to what is happening behind the scene specifically to the log file when you split a table partition.

    Read the article

  • Is READ UNCOMMITTED / NOLOCK safe in this situation?

    - by Ben Challenor
    I know that snapshot isolation would fix this problem, but I'm wondering if NOLOCK is safe in this specific case so that I can avoid the overhead. I have a table that looks something like this: drop table Data create table Data ( Id BIGINT NOT NULL, Date BIGINT NOT NULL, Value BIGINT, constraint Cx primary key (Date, Id) ) create nonclustered index Ix on Data (Id, Date) There are no updates to the table, ever. Deletes can occur but they should never contend with the SELECT because they affect the other, older end of the table. Inserts are regular and page splits to the (Id, Date) index are extremely common. I have a deadlock situation between a standard INSERT and a SELECT that looks like this: select top 1 Date, Value from Data where Id = @p0 order by Date desc because the INSERT acquires a lock on Cx (Date, Id; Value) and then Ix (Id, Date), but the SELECT acquires a lock on Ix (Id, Date) and then Cx (Date, Id; Value). This is because the SELECT first seeks on Ix and then joins to a seek on Cx. Swapping the clustered and non-clustered index would break this cycle, but it is not an acceptable solution because it would introduce cycles with other (more complex) SELECTs. If I add NOLOCK to the SELECT, can it go wrong in this case? Can it return: More than one row, even though I asked for TOP 1? No rows, even though one exists and has been committed? Worst of all, a row that doesn't satisfy the WHERE clause? I've done a lot of reading about this online, but the only reproductions of over- or under-count anomalies I've seen (one, two) involve a scan. This involves only seeks. Jeff Atwood has a post about using NOLOCK that generated a good discussion. I was particularly interested in a comment by Rick Townsend: Secondly, if you read dirty data, the risk you run is of reading the entirely wrong row. For example, if your select reads an index to find your row, then the update changes the location of the rows (e.g.: due to a page split or an update to the clustered index), when your select goes to read the actual data row, it's either no longer there, or a different row altogether! Is this possible with inserts only, and no updates? If so, then I guess even my seeks on an insert-only table could be dangerous. Update: I'm trying to figure out how snapshot isolation works. It seems to be row-based, where transactions read the table (with no shared lock!), find the row they are interested in, and then see if they need to get an old version of the row from the version store in tempdb. But in my case, no row will have more than one version, so the version store seems rather pointless. And if the row was found with no shared lock, how is it different to just using NOLOCK?

    Read the article

  • Many-To-Many Query with Linq-To-NHibernate

    - by rjygraham
    Ok guys (and gals), this one has been driving me nuts all night and I'm turning to your collective wisdom for help. I'm using Fluent Nhibernate and Linq-To-NHibernate as my data access story and I have the following simplified DB structure: CREATE TABLE [dbo].[Classes]( [Id] [bigint] IDENTITY(1,1) NOT NULL, [Name] [nvarchar](100) NOT NULL, [StartDate] [datetime2](7) NOT NULL, [EndDate] [datetime2](7) NOT NULL, CONSTRAINT [PK_Classes] PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED ( [Id] ASC ) CREATE TABLE [dbo].[Sections]( [Id] [bigint] IDENTITY(1,1) NOT NULL, [ClassId] [bigint] NOT NULL, [InternalCode] [varchar](10) NOT NULL, CONSTRAINT [PK_Sections] PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED ( [Id] ASC ) CREATE TABLE [dbo].[SectionStudents]( [SectionId] [bigint] NOT NULL, [UserId] [uniqueidentifier] NOT NULL, CONSTRAINT [PK_SectionStudents] PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED ( [SectionId] ASC, [UserId] ASC ) CREATE TABLE [dbo].[aspnet_Users]( [ApplicationId] [uniqueidentifier] NOT NULL, [UserId] [uniqueidentifier] NOT NULL, [UserName] [nvarchar](256) NOT NULL, [LoweredUserName] [nvarchar](256) NOT NULL, [MobileAlias] [nvarchar](16) NULL, [IsAnonymous] [bit] NOT NULL, [LastActivityDate] [datetime] NOT NULL, PRIMARY KEY NONCLUSTERED ( [UserId] ASC ) I omitted the foreign keys for brevity, but essentially this boils down to: A Class can have many Sections. A Section can belong to only 1 Class but can have many Students. A Student (aspnet_Users) can belong to many Sections. I've setup the corresponding Model classes and Fluent NHibernate Mapping classes, all that is working fine. Here's where I'm getting stuck. I need to write a query which will return the sections a student is enrolled in based on the student's UserId and the dates of the class. Here's what I've tried so far: 1. var sections = (from s in this.Session.Linq<Sections>() where s.Class.StartDate <= DateTime.UtcNow && s.Class.EndDate > DateTime.UtcNow && s.Students.First(f => f.UserId == userId) != null select s); 2. var sections = (from s in this.Session.Linq<Sections>() where s.Class.StartDate <= DateTime.UtcNow && s.Class.EndDate > DateTime.UtcNow && s.Students.Where(w => w.UserId == userId).FirstOrDefault().Id == userId select s); Obviously, 2 above will fail miserably if there are no students matching userId for classes the current date between it's start and end dates...but I just wanted to try. The filters for the Class StartDate and EndDate work fine, but the many-to-many relation with Students is proving to be difficult. Everytime I try running the query I get an ArgumentNullException with the message: Value cannot be null. Parameter name: session I've considered going down the path of making the SectionStudents relation a Model class with a reference to Section and a reference to Student instead of a many-to-many. I'd like to avoid that if I can, and I'm not even sure it would work that way. Thanks in advance to anyone who can help. Ryan

    Read the article

  • Arrays in database tables and normalization

    - by Ivan Petrov
    Hi! Is it smart to keep arrays in table columns? More precisely I am thinking of the following schema which to my understanding violates normalization: create table Permissions( GroupID int not null default(-1), CategoryID int not null default(-1), Permissions varchar(max) not null default(''), constraint PK_GroupCategory primary key clustered(GroupID,CategoryID) ); and this: create table Permissions( GroupID int not null default(-1), CategoryID int not null default(-1), PermissionID int not null default(-1), constraint PK_GroupCategory primary key clustered(GroupID,CategoryID) ); UPD: Forgot to mention, in the scope of this concrete question we will consider that the "fetch rows that have permission X" won't be performed, instead all the lookups will be made by GroupID and CategoryID only Thoughts? Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • SQL Server 2008 BULK INSERT causes more reads than writes. Why?

    - by sh1ng
    I've huge a table (a few billion rows) with a clustered index and two non-clustered indices. A BULK INSERT operation produces 112000 reads and only 383 writes (duration 19948ms). It's very confusing to me. Why do reads exceed writes? How can I reduce it? update query insert bulk DenormalizedPrice4 ([DP_ID] BigInt, [DP_CountryID] Int, [DP_OperatorID] SmallInt, [DP_OperatorPriceID] BigInt, [DP_SpoID] Int, [DP_TourTypeID] Int, [DP_CheckinDate] Date, [DP_CurrencyID] SmallInt, [DP_Cost] Decimal(9,2), [DP_FirstCityID] Int, [DP_FirstHotelID] Int, [DP_FirstBuildingID] Int, [DP_FirstHotelGlobalStarID] Int, [DP_FirstHotelGlobalMealID] Int, [DP_FirstHotelAccommodationTypeID] Int, [DP_FirstHotelRoomCategoryID] Int, [DP_FirstHotelRoomTypeID] Int, [DP_Days] TinyInt, [DP_Nights] TinyInt, [DP_ChildrenCount] TinyInt, [DP_AdultsCount] TinyInt, [DP_TariffID] Int, [DP_DepartureCityID] Int, [DP_DateCreated] SmallDateTime, [DP_DateDenormalized] SmallDateTime, [DP_IsHide] Bit, [DP_FirstHotelAccommodationID] Int) with (CHECK_CONSTRAINTS) No triggers & foreign keys Cluster Index by DP_ID and two non-unique indexes(with fillfactor=90%) And one more thing DB stored on RAID50 with stripe size 256K

    Read the article

  • Problems Enforcing Referential Integrity on SQL Server Tables

    - by SidC
    Hello All, I have a SQL Server 2005 database comprised of Customer, Quote, QuoteDetail tables. I want/need to enforce referential integrity such that when an insert is made on quotedetail, the quote and customer tables are also affected. I have tried my best to set up primary/foreign keys on my tables but need some help. Here's the scripts for my tables as they stand now (please don't laugh): Customers: USE [Diel_inventory] GO /****** Object: Table [dbo].[Customers] Script Date: 05/08/2010 03:39:04 ******/ SET ANSI_NULLS ON GO SET QUOTED_IDENTIFIER ON GO CREATE TABLE [dbo].[Customers]( [pkCustID] [int] IDENTITY(1,1) NOT NULL, [CompanyName] [nvarchar](50) NULL, [Address] [nvarchar](50) NULL, [City] [nvarchar](50) NULL, [State] [nvarchar](2) NULL, [ZipCode] [nvarchar](5) NULL, [OfficePhone] [nvarchar](12) NULL, [OfficeFAX] [nvarchar](12) NULL, [Email] [nvarchar](50) NULL, [PrimaryContactName] [nvarchar](50) NULL, CONSTRAINT [PK_Customers] PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED ([pkCustID] ASC)WITH (PAD_INDEX = OFF, STATISTICS_NORECOMPUTE = OFF, IGNORE_DUP_KEY = OFF, ALLOW_ROW_LOCKS = ON, ALLOW_PAGE_LOCKS = ON) ON [PRIMARY] ) ON [PRIMARY] Quotes: USE [Diel_inventory] GO /****** Object: Table [dbo].[Quotes] Script Date: 05/08/2010 03:30:46 ******/ SET ANSI_NULLS ON GO SET QUOTED_IDENTIFIER ON GO CREATE TABLE [dbo].[Quotes]( [pkQuoteID] [int] IDENTITY(1,1) NOT NULL, [fkCustomerID] [int] NOT NULL, [QuoteDate] [timestamp] NOT NULL, [NeedbyDate] [datetime] NULL, [QuoteAmt] [decimal](6, 2) NOT NULL, [QuoteApproved] [bit] NOT NULL, [fkOrderID] [int] NOT NULL, CONSTRAINT [PK_Bids] PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED ( [pkQuoteID] ASC)WITH (PAD_INDEX = OFF, STATISTICS_NORECOMPUTE = OFF, IGNORE_DUP_KEY = OFF, ALLOW_ROW_LOCKS = ON, ALLOW_PAGE_LOCKS = ON) ON [PRIMARY] ) ON [PRIMARY] GO ALTER TABLE [dbo].[Quotes] WITH CHECK ADD CONSTRAINT [fkCustomerID] FOREIGN KEY([fkCustomerID]) REFERENCES [dbo].[Customers] ([pkCustID]) GO ALTER TABLE [dbo].[Quotes] CHECK CONSTRAINT [fkCustomerID] QuoteDetail: USE [Diel_inventory] GO /****** Object: Table [dbo].[QuoteDetail] Script Date: 05/08/2010 03:31:58 ******/ SET ANSI_NULLS ON GO SET QUOTED_IDENTIFIER ON GO CREATE TABLE [dbo].[QuoteDetail]( [ID] [int] IDENTITY(1,1) NOT NULL, [fkQuoteID] [int] NOT NULL, [fkCustomerID] [int] NOT NULL, [fkPartID] [int] NULL, [PartNumber1] [float] NOT NULL, [Qty1] [int] NOT NULL, [PartNumber2] [float] NULL, [Qty2] [int] NULL, [PartNumber3] [float] NULL, [Qty3] [int] NULL, [PartNumber4] [float] NULL, [Qty4] [int] NULL, [PartNumber5] [float] NULL, [Qty5] [int] NULL, [PartNumber6] [float] NULL, [Qty6] [int] NULL, [PartNumber7] [float] NULL, [Qty7] [int] NULL, [PartNumber8] [float] NULL, [Qty8] [int] NULL, [PartNumber9] [float] NULL, [Qty9] [int] NULL, [PartNumber10] [float] NULL, [Qty10] [int] NULL, [PartNumber11] [float] NULL, [Qty11] [int] NULL, [PartNumber12] [float] NULL, [Qty12] [int] NULL, [PartNumber13] [float] NULL, [Qty13] [int] NULL, [PartNumber14] [float] NULL, [Qty14] [int] NULL, [PartNumber15] [float] NULL, [Qty15] [int] NULL, [PartNumber16] [float] NULL, [Qty16] [int] NULL, [PartNumber17] [float] NULL, [Qty17] [int] NULL, [PartNumber18] [float] NULL, [Qty18] [int] NULL, [PartNumber19] [float] NULL, [Qty19] [int] NULL, [PartNumber20] [float] NULL, [Qty20] [int] NULL, CONSTRAINT [PK_QuoteDetail] PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED ( [ID] ASC )WITH (PAD_INDEX = OFF, STATISTICS_NORECOMPUTE = OFF, IGNORE_DUP_KEY = OFF, ALLOW_ROW_LOCKS = ON, ALLOW_PAGE_LOCKS = ON) ON [PRIMARY] ) ON [PRIMARY] GO ALTER TABLE [dbo].[QuoteDetail] WITH CHECK ADD CONSTRAINT [FK_QuoteDetail_Customers] FOREIGN KEY ([fkCustomerID]) REFERENCES [dbo].[Customers] ([pkCustID]) GO ALTER TABLE [dbo].[QuoteDetail] CHECK CONSTRAINT [FK_QuoteDetail_Customers] GO ALTER TABLE [dbo].[QuoteDetail] WITH CHECK ADD CONSTRAINT [FK_QuoteDetail_PartList] FOREIGN KEY ([fkPartID]) REFERENCES [dbo].[PartList] ([RecID]) GO ALTER TABLE [dbo].[QuoteDetail] CHECK CONSTRAINT [FK_QuoteDetail_PartList] GO ALTER TABLE [dbo].[QuoteDetail] WITH CHECK ADD CONSTRAINT [FK_QuoteDetail_Quotes] FOREIGN KEY([fkQuoteID]) REFERENCES [dbo].[Quotes] ([pkQuoteID]) GO ALTER TABLE [dbo].[QuoteDetail] CHECK CONSTRAINT [FK_QuoteDetail_Quotes] Your advice/guidance on how to set these up so that customer ID in Customers is the same as in Quotes (referential integrity) and that CustomerID is inserted on Quotes and Customers when an insert is made to QuoteDetial would be much appreciated. Thanks, Sid

    Read the article

  • sql server procedure optimization

    - by stackoverflow
    SQl Server 2005: Option: 1 CREATE TABLE #test (customerid, orderdate, field1 INT, field2 INT, field3 INT) CREATE UNIQUE CLUSTERED INDEX Idx1 ON #test(customerid) CREATE INDEX Idx2 ON #test(field1 DESC) CREATE INDEX Idx3 ON #test(field2 DESC) CREATE INDEX Idx4 ON #test(field3 DESC) INSERT INTO #test (customerid, orderdate, field1 INT, field2 INT, field3 INT) SELECT customerid, orderdate, field1, field2, field3 FROM ATABLERETURNING4000000ROWS compared to Option: 2 CREATE TABLE #test (customerid, orderdate, field1 INT, field2 INT, field3 INT) INSERT INTO #test (customerid, orderdate, field1 INT, field2 INT, field3 INT) SELECT customerid, orderdate, field1, field2, field3 FROM ATABLERETURNING4000000ROWS CREATE UNIQUE CLUSTERED INDEX Idx1 ON #test(customerid) CREATE INDEX Idx2 ON #test(field1 DESC) CREATE INDEX Idx3 ON #test(field2 DESC) CREATE INDEX Idx4 ON #test(field3 DESC) When we use the second option it runs close to 50% faster. Why is this?

    Read the article

  • Disable Primary Key and Re-Enable After SQL Bulk Insert

    - by Jon
    I am about to run a massive data insert into my DB. I have managed to work out how to enable and rebuild non-clustered indexes on my tables but I also want to disable/enable primary keys. You can't disable the clustered index for the primary key as the table is inaccessible when that is done and my attempt to do a ALTER TABLE for constraints does not work as I think that is only for foreign keys. Do you know of a way to Disable the Primary Key and Re-Enable After SQL Bulk Insert. NOTE: This is over numerous tables and so I don't know the exact primary key specifications eg/name etc

    Read the article

  • why single SQL delete statement will cause deadlock?

    - by George2
    Hello everyone, I am using SQL Server 2008 Enterprise. I am wondering why even a single delete statement of this store procedure will cause deadlock if executed by multiple threads at the same time? For the delete statement, Param1 is a column of table FooTable, Param1 is a foreign key of another table (refers to another primary key clustered index column of the other table). There is no index on Param1 itself for table FooTable. FooTable has another column which is used as clustered primary key, but not Param1 column. create PROCEDURE [dbo].[FooProc] ( @Param1 int ,@Param2 int ,@Param3 int ) AS DELETE FooTable WHERE Param1 = @Param1 INSERT INTO FooTable ( Param1 ,Param2 ,Param3 ) VALUES ( @Param1 ,@Param2 ,@Param3 ) DECLARE @ID bigint SET @ID = ISNULL(@@Identity,-1) IF @ID > 0 BEGIN SELECT IdentityStr FROM FooTable WHERE ID = @ID END thanks in advance, George

    Read the article

  • Sql Server query performance

    - by Macros
    I have a stored procedure on a busy database which constantly come out top in the list of expensive queries (by some way). The query is very simple, it takes a single parameter (@ID, int) which is the primary key of the table, and selects the record that matches that ID. The primary key is an identity field with a clustered index, so I am stumped as to how to optimise this any further? The query is as follows CREATE PROCEDURE [dbo].[P_Call_Get] @ID int = null AS select ID, AppID, AgentID, AgentLogin, Ext, VDN, VDNName, Skill, SkillName, CallFrom, TelNoFrom, ParentCallID, CallStart, ACWStart, CallEnd, Outcome, StageID, TxTo, TxSuccess, ServiceID, DiallerID, CRC, TSCallID, CallDirection, [Manual], CallBackAgent, CallBackDateTime, Notes from P_Call where (ID = @ID or @ID is null) Not sure the best way to post the execution plan - all it shows is that 100% of the operation is taken up by the clustered index scan

    Read the article

  • how do i insert into two table all at once in a stored procedure?

    - by user996502
    Doing a project for school so any help would be great thank you! I have two tables how do i insert into two tables? so both tables are linked. First table called Customer with primary key called CID that auto increments CREATE TABLE [dbo].[Customer]( [CID] [int] IDENTITY(1,1) NOT NULL, [LastName] [varchar](255) NOT NULL, [FirstName] [varchar](255) NOT NULL, [MiddleName] [varchar](255) NULL, [EmailAddress] [varchar](255) NOT NULL, [PhoneNumber] [varchar](12) NOT NULL CONSTRAINT [PK__CInforma__C1F8DC5968DD69DC] PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED ( And a second table called Employment that has a foreign key linked to the parent table CREATE TABLE [dbo].[Employment]( [EID] [int] IDENTITY(1,1) NOT NULL, [CID] [int] NOT NULL, [Employer] [varchar](255) NOT NULL, [Occupation] [varchar](255) NOT NULL, [Income] [varchar](25) NOT NULL, [WPhone] [varchar](12) NOT NULL, CONSTRAINT [PK__Employme__C190170BC7827524] PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED (

    Read the article

  • Why isn't INT more efficient than UNIQUEIDENTIFIER (according to the execution plan)?

    - by ck
    I have a parent table and child table where the columns that join them together are the UNIQUEIDENTIFIER type. The child table has a clustered index on the column that joins it to the parent table (its PK, which is also clustered). I have created a copy of both of these tables but changed the relationship columns to be INTs instead, have rebuilt the indexes so that they are essentially the same structure and can be queried in the same way. When I query for a known 20 records from the parent table, pulling in all the related records from the child tables, I get identical query costs across both, i.e. 50/50 cost for the batches. If this is true, then my giant project to change all of the tables like this appears to be pointless, other than speeding up inserts. Can anyone provide any light on the situation? EDIT: The question is not about which is more efficient, but why is the query execution plan showing both queries as having the same cost?

    Read the article

  • SQL Server – Learning SQL Server Performance: Indexing Basics – Video

    - by pinaldave
    Today I remember one of my older cartoon years ago created for Indexing and Performance. Every single time when Performance is discussed, Indexes are mentioned along with it. In recent times, data and application complexity is continuously growing.  The demand for faster query response, performance, and scalability by organizations is increasing and developers and DBAs need to now write efficient code to achieve this. DBA and Developers A DBA’s role is critical, because a production environment has to run 24×7, hence maintenance, trouble shooting, and quick resolutions are the need of the hour.  The first baby step into any performance tuning exercise in SQL Server involves creating, analysing, and maintaining indexes. Though we have learnt indexing concepts from our college days, indexing implementation inside SQL Server can vary.  Understanding this behaviour and designing our applications appropriately will make sure the application is performed to its highest potential. Video Learning Vinod Kumar and myself we often thought about this and realized that practical understanding of the indexes is very important. One can not master every single aspects of the index. However there are some minimum expertise one should gain if performance is one of the concern. We decided to build a course which just addresses the practical aspects of the performance. In this course, we explored some of these indexing fundamentals and we elaborated on how SQL Server goes about using indexes.  At the end of this course of you will know the basic structure of indexes, practical insights into implementation, and maintenance tips and tricks revolving around indexes.  Finally, we will introduce SQL Server 2012 column store indexes.  We have refrained from discussing internal storage structure of the indexes but have taken a more practical, demo-oriented approach to explain these core concepts. Course Outline Here are salient topics of the course. We have explained every single concept along with a practical demonstration. Additionally shared our personal scripts along with the same. Introduction Fundamentals of Indexing Index Fundamentals Index Fundamentals – Visual Representation Practical Indexing Implementation Techniques Primary Key Over Indexing Duplicate Index Clustered Index Unique Index Included Columns Filtered Index Disabled Index Index Maintenance and Defragmentation Introduction to Columnstore Index Indexing Practical Performance Tips and Tricks Index and Page Types Index and Non Deterministic Columns Index and SET Values Importance of Clustered Index Effect of Compression and Fillfactor Index and Functions Dynamic Management Views (DMV) – Fillfactor Table Scan, Index Scan and Index Seek Index and Order of Columns Final Checklist: Index and Performance Well, we believe we have done our part, now waiting for your comments and feedback. Reference: Pinal Dave (http://blog.sqlauthority.com) Filed under: PostADay, SQL, SQL Authority, SQL Index, SQL Performance, SQL Query, SQL Server, SQL Tips and Tricks, SQLServer, T SQL, Technology, Video

    Read the article

  • SQLAuthority News – Monthly Roundup of Best SQL Posts

    - by pinaldave
    After receiving lots of requests from different readers for long time I have decided to write first monthly round up. If all of you like it I will continue writing the same every month. In fact, I really like the idea as I was able to go back and read all of my posts written in this month. This month was started with answering one of the most common question asked me to about What is Adventureworks? Many of you know the answer but to the surprise more number of the reader did not know the answer. There were few extra blog post which were in the same line as following. SQL SERVER – The Difference between Dual Core vs. Core 2 Duo SQLAuthority News – Wireless Router Security and Attached Devices – Complex Password SQL SERVER – DATE and TIME in SQL Server 2008 DMVs are also one of the most handy tools available in SQL Server, I have written following blog post where I have used DMV in scripts. SQL SERVER – Get Latest SQL Query for Sessions – DMV SQL SERVER – Find Most Expensive Queries Using DMV SQL SERVER – List All the DMV and DMF on Server I was able to write two follow-up of my earlier series where I was finding the size of the indexes using different SQL Scripts. And in fact one of the article Powershell is used as well. This was my very first attempt to use Powershell. SQL SERVER – Size of Index Table for Each Index – Solution 2 SQL SERVER – Size of Index Table for Each Index – Solution 3 – Powershell SQL SERVER – Four Posts on Removing the Bookmark Lookup – Key Lookup Without realizing I wrote series of the blog post on disabled index here is its complete list. I plan to write one more follow-up list on the same. SQL SERVER – Disable Clustered Index and Data Insert SQL SERVER – Understanding ALTER INDEX ALL REBUILD with Disabled Clustered Index SQL SERVER – Disabled Index and Update Statistics Two special post which I found very interesting to write are as following. SQL SERVER – SHRINKFILE and TRUNCATE Log File in SQL Server 2008 SQL SERVER – Simple Example of Snapshot Isolation – Reduce the Blocking Transactions In personal adventures, I won the Community Impact Award for Last Year from Microsoft. Please leave your comment about how can I improve this round up or what more details I should include in the same. Reference: Pinal Dave (http://blog.SQLAuthority.com) Filed under: Pinal Dave, SQL, SQL Authority, SQL Query, SQL Server, SQL Tips and Tricks, SQLAuthority News, T SQL, Technology

    Read the article

  • SQL SERVER – Index Created on View not Used Often – Observation of the View – Part 2

    - by pinaldave
    Earlier, I have written an article about SQL SERVER – Index Created on View not Used Often – Observation of the View. I received an email from one of the readers, asking if there would no problems when we create the Index on the base table. Well, we need to discuss this situation in two different cases. Before proceeding to the discussion, I strongly suggest you read my earlier articles. To avoid the duplication, I am not going to repeat the code and explanation over here. In all the earlier cases, I have explained in detail how Index created on the View is not utilized. SQL SERVER – Index Created on View not Used Often – Limitation of the View 12 SQL SERVER – Index Created on View not Used Often – Observation of the View SQL SERVER – Indexed View always Use Index on Table As per earlier blog posts, so far we have done the following: Create a Table Create a View Create Index On View Write SELECT with ORDER BY on View However, the blog reader who emailed me suggests the extension of the said logic, which is as follows: Create a Table Create a View Create Index On View Write SELECT with ORDER BY on View Create Index on the Base Table Write SELECT with ORDER BY on View After doing the last two steps, the question is “Will the query on the View utilize the Index on the View, or will it still use the Index of the base table?“ Let us first run the Create example. USE tempdb GO IF EXISTS (SELECT * FROM sys.views WHERE OBJECT_ID = OBJECT_ID(N'[dbo].[SampleView]')) DROP VIEW [dbo].[SampleView] GO IF EXISTS (SELECT * FROM sys.objects WHERE OBJECT_ID = OBJECT_ID(N'[dbo].[mySampleTable]') AND TYPE IN (N'U')) DROP TABLE [dbo].[mySampleTable] GO -- Create SampleTable CREATE TABLE mySampleTable (ID1 INT, ID2 INT, SomeData VARCHAR(100)) INSERT INTO mySampleTable (ID1,ID2,SomeData) SELECT TOP 100000 ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY o1.name), ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY o2.name), o2.name FROM sys.all_objects o1 CROSS JOIN sys.all_objects o2 GO -- Create View CREATE VIEW SampleView WITH SCHEMABINDING AS SELECT ID1,ID2,SomeData FROM dbo.mySampleTable GO -- Create Index on View CREATE UNIQUE CLUSTERED INDEX [IX_ViewSample] ON [dbo].[SampleView] ( ID2 ASC ) GO -- Select from view SELECT ID1,ID2,SomeData FROM SampleView ORDER BY ID2 GO -- Create Index on Original Table -- On Column ID1 CREATE UNIQUE CLUSTERED INDEX [IX_OriginalTable] ON mySampleTable ( ID1 ASC ) GO -- On Column ID2 CREATE UNIQUE NONCLUSTERED INDEX [IX_OriginalTable_ID2] ON mySampleTable ( ID2 ) GO -- Select from view SELECT ID1,ID2,SomeData FROM SampleView ORDER BY ID2 GO Now let us see the execution plans for both of the SELECT statement. Before Index on Base Table (with Index on View): After Index on Base Table (with Index on View): Looking at both executions, it is very clear that with or without, the View is using Indexes. Alright, I have written 11 disadvantages of the Views. Now I have written one case where the View is using Indexes. Anybody who says that I am being harsh on Views can say now that I found one place where Index on View can be helpful. Reference: Pinal Dave (http://blog.SQLAuthority.com) Filed under: Pinal Dave, SQL, SQL Authority, SQL Optimization, SQL Performance, SQL Query, SQL Scripts, SQL Server, SQL Tips and Tricks, SQL View, SQLServer, T SQL, Technology

    Read the article

  • Using Oracle Database's 11gR2 New ASM Features During ASM Migration

    Oracle Database 11gR2 offers several new Automatic Storage Management features for managing both Oracle database files as well as files stored within its new ASM Clustered File System. This article illustrates how to upgrade an Oracle database quickly and efficiently from version 11gR1 to 11gR2 and then migrate all of its database files so they&#146;re resident within ASM-managed storage.

    Read the article

  • SPARC T4-4 Beats 8-CPU IBM POWER7 on TPC-H @3000GB Benchmark

    - by Brian
    Oracle's SPARC T4-4 server delivered a world record TPC-H @3000GB benchmark result for systems with four processors. This result beats eight processor results from IBM (POWER7) and HP (x86). The SPARC T4-4 server also delivered better performance per core than these eight processor systems from IBM and HP. Comparisons below are based upon system to system comparisons, highlighting Oracle's complete software and hardware solution. This database world record result used Oracle's Sun Storage 2540-M2 arrays (rotating disk) connected to a SPARC T4-4 server running Oracle Solaris 11 and Oracle Database 11g Release 2 demonstrating the power of Oracle's integrated hardware and software solution. The SPARC T4-4 server based configuration achieved a TPC-H scale factor 3000 world record for four processor systems of 205,792 QphH@3000GB with price/performance of $4.10/QphH@3000GB. The SPARC T4-4 server with four SPARC T4 processors (total of 32 cores) is 7% faster than the IBM Power 780 server with eight POWER7 processors (total of 32 cores) on the TPC-H @3000GB benchmark. The SPARC T4-4 server is 36% better in price performance compared to the IBM Power 780 server on the TPC-H @3000GB Benchmark. The SPARC T4-4 server is 29% faster than the IBM Power 780 for data loading. The SPARC T4-4 server is up to 3.4 times faster than the IBM Power 780 server for the Refresh Function. The SPARC T4-4 server with four SPARC T4 processors is 27% faster than the HP ProLiant DL980 G7 server with eight x86 processors on the TPC-H @3000GB benchmark. The SPARC T4-4 server is 52% faster than the HP ProLiant DL980 G7 server for data loading. The SPARC T4-4 server is up to 3.2 times faster than the HP ProLiant DL980 G7 for the Refresh Function. The SPARC T4-4 server achieved a peak IO rate from the Oracle database of 17 GB/sec. This rate was independent of the storage used, as demonstrated by the TPC-H @3000TB benchmark which used twelve Sun Storage 2540-M2 arrays (rotating disk) and the TPC-H @1000TB benchmark which used four Sun Storage F5100 Flash Array devices (flash storage). [*] The SPARC T4-4 server showed linear scaling from TPC-H @1000GB to TPC-H @3000GB. This demonstrates that the SPARC T4-4 server can handle the increasingly larger databases required of DSS systems. [*] The SPARC T4-4 server benchmark results demonstrate a complete solution of building Decision Support Systems including data loading, business questions and refreshing data. Each phase usually has a time constraint and the SPARC T4-4 server shows superior performance during each phase. [*] The TPC believes that comparisons of results published with different scale factors are misleading and discourages such comparisons. Performance Landscape The table lists the leading TPC-H @3000GB results for non-clustered systems. TPC-H @3000GB, Non-Clustered Systems System Processor P/C/T – Memory Composite(QphH) $/perf($/QphH) Power(QppH) Throughput(QthH) Database Available SPARC Enterprise M9000 3.0 GHz SPARC64 VII+ 64/256/256 – 1024 GB 386,478.3 $18.19 316,835.8 471,428.6 Oracle 11g R2 09/22/11 SPARC T4-4 3.0 GHz SPARC T4 4/32/256 – 1024 GB 205,792.0 $4.10 190,325.1 222,515.9 Oracle 11g R2 05/31/12 SPARC Enterprise M9000 2.88 GHz SPARC64 VII 32/128/256 – 512 GB 198,907.5 $15.27 182,350.7 216,967.7 Oracle 11g R2 12/09/10 IBM Power 780 4.1 GHz POWER7 8/32/128 – 1024 GB 192,001.1 $6.37 210,368.4 175,237.4 Sybase 15.4 11/30/11 HP ProLiant DL980 G7 2.27 GHz Intel Xeon X7560 8/64/128 – 512 GB 162,601.7 $2.68 185,297.7 142,685.6 SQL Server 2008 10/13/10 P/C/T = Processors, Cores, Threads QphH = the Composite Metric (bigger is better) $/QphH = the Price/Performance metric in USD (smaller is better) QppH = the Power Numerical Quantity QthH = the Throughput Numerical Quantity The following table lists data load times and refresh function times during the power run. TPC-H @3000GB, Non-Clustered Systems Database Load & Database Refresh System Processor Data Loading(h:m:s) T4Advan RF1(sec) T4Advan RF2(sec) T4Advan SPARC T4-4 3.0 GHz SPARC T4 04:08:29 1.0x 67.1 1.0x 39.5 1.0x IBM Power 780 4.1 GHz POWER7 05:51:50 1.5x 147.3 2.2x 133.2 3.4x HP ProLiant DL980 G7 2.27 GHz Intel Xeon X7560 08:35:17 2.1x 173.0 2.6x 126.3 3.2x Data Loading = database load time RF1 = power test first refresh transaction RF2 = power test second refresh transaction T4 Advan = the ratio of time to T4 time Complete benchmark results found at the TPC benchmark website http://www.tpc.org. Configuration Summary and Results Hardware Configuration: SPARC T4-4 server 4 x SPARC T4 3.0 GHz processors (total of 32 cores, 128 threads) 1024 GB memory 8 x internal SAS (8 x 300 GB) disk drives External Storage: 12 x Sun Storage 2540-M2 array storage, each with 12 x 15K RPM 300 GB drives, 2 controllers, 2 GB cache Software Configuration: Oracle Solaris 11 11/11 Oracle Database 11g Release 2 Enterprise Edition Audited Results: Database Size: 3000 GB (Scale Factor 3000) TPC-H Composite: 205,792.0 QphH@3000GB Price/performance: $4.10/QphH@3000GB Available: 05/31/2012 Total 3 year Cost: $843,656 TPC-H Power: 190,325.1 TPC-H Throughput: 222,515.9 Database Load Time: 4:08:29 Benchmark Description The TPC-H benchmark is a performance benchmark established by the Transaction Processing Council (TPC) to demonstrate Data Warehousing/Decision Support Systems (DSS). TPC-H measurements are produced for customers to evaluate the performance of various DSS systems. These queries and updates are executed against a standard database under controlled conditions. Performance projections and comparisons between different TPC-H Database sizes (100GB, 300GB, 1000GB, 3000GB, 10000GB, 30000GB and 100000GB) are not allowed by the TPC. TPC-H is a data warehousing-oriented, non-industry-specific benchmark that consists of a large number of complex queries typical of decision support applications. It also includes some insert and delete activity that is intended to simulate loading and purging data from a warehouse. TPC-H measures the combined performance of a particular database manager on a specific computer system. The main performance metric reported by TPC-H is called the TPC-H Composite Query-per-Hour Performance Metric (QphH@SF, where SF is the number of GB of raw data, referred to as the scale factor). QphH@SF is intended to summarize the ability of the system to process queries in both single and multiple user modes. The benchmark requires reporting of price/performance, which is the ratio of the total HW/SW cost plus 3 years maintenance to the QphH. A secondary metric is the storage efficiency, which is the ratio of total configured disk space in GB to the scale factor. Key Points and Best Practices Twelve Sun Storage 2540-M2 arrays were used for the benchmark. Each Sun Storage 2540-M2 array contains 12 15K RPM drives and is connected to a single dual port 8Gb FC HBA using 2 ports. Each Sun Storage 2540-M2 array showed 1.5 GB/sec for sequential read operations and showed linear scaling, achieving 18 GB/sec with twelve Sun Storage 2540-M2 arrays. These were stand alone IO tests. The peak IO rate measured from the Oracle database was 17 GB/sec. Oracle Solaris 11 11/11 required very little system tuning. Some vendors try to make the point that storage ratios are of customer concern. However, storage ratio size has more to do with disk layout and the increasing capacities of disks – so this is not an important metric in which to compare systems. The SPARC T4-4 server and Oracle Solaris efficiently managed the system load of over one thousand Oracle Database parallel processes. Six Sun Storage 2540-M2 arrays were mirrored to another six Sun Storage 2540-M2 arrays on which all of the Oracle database files were placed. IO performance was high and balanced across all the arrays. The TPC-H Refresh Function (RF) simulates periodical refresh portion of Data Warehouse by adding new sales and deleting old sales data. Parallel DML (parallel insert and delete in this case) and database log performance are a key for this function and the SPARC T4-4 server outperformed both the IBM POWER7 server and HP ProLiant DL980 G7 server. (See the RF columns above.) See Also Transaction Processing Performance Council (TPC) Home Page Ideas International Benchmark Page SPARC T4-4 Server oracle.com OTN Oracle Solaris oracle.com OTN Oracle Database 11g Release 2 Enterprise Edition oracle.com OTN Sun Storage 2540-M2 Array oracle.com OTN Disclosure Statement TPC-H, QphH, $/QphH are trademarks of Transaction Processing Performance Council (TPC). For more information, see www.tpc.org. SPARC T4-4 205,792.0 QphH@3000GB, $4.10/QphH@3000GB, available 5/31/12, 4 processors, 32 cores, 256 threads; IBM Power 780 QphH@3000GB, 192,001.1 QphH@3000GB, $6.37/QphH@3000GB, available 11/30/11, 8 processors, 32 cores, 128 threads; HP ProLiant DL980 G7 162,601.7 QphH@3000GB, $2.68/QphH@3000GB available 10/13/10, 8 processors, 64 cores, 128 threads.

    Read the article

  • ... i just avoid GUID

    - by Tomaz.tsql
    Our partner was explaining to me that they are using GUID as primary key on all the tables. My immediate reaction was - why? and couple of basic doubts were: - since I can read uniqueidentifier, it does not tell me absolutely anything - if I will use my relational table, i sure will use other columns to get the information out - SQL is terrible when setting up clustered index on GUID columns (and hence performance problems) - why not use INT? it will save you space on disk, optimizer will be able...(read more)

    Read the article

  • SQL SERVER Force Index Scan on Table Use No Index to Retrieve the Data Query Hint

    Recently I received the following two questions from readers and both the questions have very similar answers.Question 1: I have a unique requirement where I do not want to use any index of the table; how can I achieve this?Question 2: Currently my table uses clustered index and does seek operation; how can I convert [...]...Did you know that DotNetSlackers also publishes .net articles written by top known .net Authors? We already have over 80 articles in several categories including Silverlight. Take a look: here.

    Read the article

  • Oracle Database 11gR2: Installing Grid Infrastructure

    Jim Czuprynski demonstrates how to install and configure a new Oracle Database 11g Release 2 (11gR2) Grid Infrastructure home as the basis for the majority of the grid computing features that were only available in a Real Application Clusters (RAC) clustered database environment in previous releases.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14  | Next Page >