HI I have my application running on my production server perfectly, I updated the application some 2 days ago and since then I experienced some performance related issue. The issue is when you click the button the query that runs against that button needs some 1 min or more to pull out the result and my application thus shows time out error but the same application runs fine here in my local.
I don't think its the issue related to query optimization since its simple select query having joins b/w 2 tables and its some 40-50 records pulled.
I am using SQL 2012 database, Is there any setting needs to be done on it?
Could be anything dude, without having all the information. E.g. recent degraded disk on DB server, fragmented indexes, inefficient joins, inefficient query...
Here are some general tips...
User Performance Monitor (PerfMon) to capture and review any long running queries
DBCC FREEPROCCACHE
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-AU/library/ms174283.aspx
DBCC INDEXDEFRAG
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-au/library/ms177571.aspx
or more intrusive, rebuild indexes DBCC DBREINDEX
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms181671.aspx
Review the health of the database server, in particular harddrives where data and log files reside. Also, check server CPUs usages.
Related
We are having issues with one of Azure database where the DTU is hitting 100% almost at all times.
DTU Percentage is showing max
This is causing connection failure when some other applications are trying to connect with the database as database is taking to long to respond to create a connection and the connection is timing out.
We had a quick look at the schema and could see that some tables and stored procedures which are not created by us are somehow generated. On modifying these procedures, we find out that some of these are running and appearing in high execution queries list. I am pasting the screenshot of these tables and SPs here. Does anyone know how these are created/auto generated in the database and if these are auto generated, there is a way to find out which application has created and executing these?
Stored Procedures
Tables
I have sql azure database. Currently I'm using the "Web" SQL database since my DB was small ie about 300mb and the maximum size is 5GB. I came to know that the Web service tiers will be retired in September 2015 i have restored my my Live DB as a "Standard" s0 which has a maximum size of 2 GB. But what i noticed is the performance with the new standard type database is poor when compared to the retired web edition. Say for instance it used to take like 40 seconds to delete 60 thousand records in the Web edition and it is now taking two minutes to 3 minutes with the new standard type. Have any one experienced this kind of thing or its just me ?
Please give me your suggestions
I had a similar issue; I migrated sql 2008 to Azure web; got a performance hit; then switched from web to S0; got another hit. I think im now at s1
I figured it was probably missing indexes; but with the ability to Trace + tune gone with azure, I had to do things a bit more manually.
First, look at this, http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/azure/ff394114.aspx you want to be able to get to the part where you can get the long running queries.
Then, with each long running query; you will want to execute the execution plan. To view a query’s execution plan, we need to explicitly include it before executing the query. Right-Click the query window and select Include Actual Execution Plan.
If this does not help you then you need to do more work; what you will want to do is export the database (it comes out as a bacpac file) to sql 2012 (Right click on the Connection > Databases node and select "Import Data-tier application...") on a local server somwhere (I used an Azure VM); then hookup an application/website to this, enable query analyzer., and tune it the old way., this will reveal all the non-clustered indexes that magically disappeared... once you add those to your sql azure db, you will get performance back.
Sure you could just increase your standard tier., but this can get expensive., its better to tune and find out where things went wrong...
I have recently just started working with firebird DB v2.1 on a Linux Redhawk 5.4.11 system. I am trying to create a monitor script that gets kicked off via a cron job. However I am running into a few issues and I was hoping for some advice...
First off I have read through most of the documentation that come with the firebird DB and a lot of the documentation that is provided on their site. I have tried using the gstat tool which is supplied but that didn't seem to give me the kind of information I was looking for. I ran across README.monitoring_tables file which seemed to be exactly what I wanted to monitor. Yet this is where I started to hit a snag in my progress....
After running from logging into the db via isql, I run SELECT MON$PAGE_READS, MON$PAGE_WRITES FROM MON$IO_STATS; I was able to get some numbers which seemed okay. However upon running the command again it appeared the data was stale because the numbers were not updating. I waited 1 minute, 5 minutes, 15 minutes and all the data was the same during each. Once I logged off and back on to run the command again the data changed. It appears that only on a relog does the data refresh and yet I am not sure if even then the data is correct.
My question is now am I even doing this correct? Are these commands truly monitoring my db or are just monitoring the command itself? Also why does it take a relog to refresh the statistics? One thing I was worried about was inconsistency in my data. In other words my system was running yet when I would logon each time the read/writes were not linearly increasing. They would vary from 10k to 500 to 2k. Any advice or help would be appreciated!
When you query a monitoring table, a snapshot of the monitoring information is created so the contents of the monitoring tables are stable for the rest of the transaction. You need to commit and start a new transaction if you want fresh information. Firebird always uses a transaction (and isql implicitly starts a transaction if none was started explicitly).
This is also documented in doc/README.monitoring_tables (at least in the Firebird 2.5 version):
A snapshot is created the first time any of the monitoring tables is being selected from in the given transaction and it's preserved until the transaction ends, so multiple queries (e.g. master-detail ones) will always return the consistent view of the data. In other words, the monitoring tables always behave like a snapshot (aka consistency) transaction, even if the host transaction has been started with another isolation level. To refresh the snapshot, the current transaction should be finished and the monitoring tables should be queried in the new transaction context.
(emphasis mine)
Note that depending on your monitoring needs, you should also look at the trace functionality that was introduced in Firebird 2.5.
We are using SQL Azure for our application and need some inputs on how to handle queries that scan a lot data for reporting. Our application is both read/write intensive and so we don't want the report queries to block the rest of the operations.
To avoid connection pooling issues caused by long running queries we put the code that queries the DB for reporting onto a worker role. This still does not avoid the database getting hit with a bunch of read only queries.
Is there something we are missing here - Could we setup a read only replica which all the reporting calls hit?
Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
Have a look at SQL Azure Data Sync. It will allow you to incrementally update your reporting database.
here are a couple of links to get you started
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/hh667301.aspx
http://social.technet.microsoft.com/wiki/contents/articles/1821.sql-data-sync-overview.aspx
I think it is still in CTP though.
How about this:
Create a separate connection string for reporting, for example use a different Application Name
For your reporting queries use SET TRANSACTION ISOLATION LEVEL SNAPSHOT
This should prevent your long running queries blocking your operational queries. This will also allow your reports to get a consistent read.
Since you're talking about reporting I'm assuming you don't need real time data. In that case, you can consider creating a copy of your production database at a regular interval (every 12 hours for example).
In SQL Azure it's very easy to create a copy:
-- Execute on the master database.
-- Start copying.
CREATE DATABASE Database1B AS COPY OF Database1A;
Your reporting would happen on Database1B without impacting the actual production database (Database1A).
You are saying you have a lot of read-only queries...any possibility of caching them? (perfect since it is read-only)
What reporting tool are you using? You can output cache the queries as well if needed.
I am working in a MOSS 2007 project and have customized many parts of it. There is a problem in the production server where it takes a very long time (more than 15 minutes, sometimes fails due to timeouts) to create a sub site (even with the built-in site templates). While in the development server, it only takes 1 to 2 minutes.
Both servers are having same configuration with 8 cores CPU and 8 GIGs RAM. Both are using separate database servers with the same configuration. The content db size is around 100 GB. More than a hundred subsites are there.
What could be the reason why in the other server it will take so much time? Is there any configuration or something else I need to take care?
Update:
So today I had the chance to check the environment with my clients. But site creation was so fast though they said they didn't change any configuration in the server.
I also used that chance to examine the database. The disk fragmentation was quite high at 49% so I suggested them to run defrag. And I also asked the database file growth to be increased to 100MB, up from the default 1MB.
So my suspicion is that some processes were running heavily on the server previously, that's why it took that much of time.
Update 2:
Yesterday my client reported that the site creation was slow again so I went to check it. When I checked the db, I found that instead of the reported 100GB, the content db size is only around 30GB. So it's still far below the recommended size.
One thing that got my attention is, the site collection recycle bin was holding almost 5 millions items. And whenever I tried to browse the site collection recycle bin, it would take a lot of time to open and the whole site collection is inaccessible.
Since the web application setting is set to the default (30 days before cleaning up, and 50% size for the second stage recycle bin), is this normal or is this a potential problem also?
Actually, there was also another web application using the same database server with 100GB content db and it's always fast. But the one with 30GB is slow. Both are having the same setup, only different data.
What should I check next?
So today I had the chance to check the environment with my clients. But site creation was so fast though they said they didn't change any configuration in the server.
I also used that chance to examine the database. The disk fragmentation was quite high at 49% so I suggested them to run defrag. And I also asked the database file growth to be increased to 100MB, up from the default 1MB.
So my suspicion is that some processes were running heavily on the server previously, that's why it took that much of time.
Thanks for the inputs everyone, I really appreciate.
Yesterday my client reported that the site creation was slow again so I went to check it. When I checked the db, I found that instead of the reported 100GB, the content db size is only around 30GB. So it's still far below the recommended size.
One thing that got my attention is, the site collection recycle bin was holding almost 5 millions items. And whenever I tried to browse the site collection recycle bin, it would take a lot of time to open and the whole site collection is inaccessible.
Since the web application setting is set to the default (30 days before cleaning up, and 50% size for the second stage recycle bin), is this normal or is this a potential problem also?
Actually, there was also another web application using the same database server with 100GB content db and it's always fast. But the one with 30GB is slow. Both are having the same setup, only different data.
Any idea what should I check next? Thanks a lot.
Yes, its normal OOB if you haven't turned the Second Stage Recycle bin off or set a site quota. If a site quota has not been set then the growth of the Second Stage Recycle bin is not limited...
the second stage recycle bin is by default limited to 50% size of the site quota, in other words if you have a site quota of 100gb then you would have a Second Stage recycle bin of 50gb. If a site quota has not been set, there are not any growth limitations...
I second everything Nat has said and emphasize splitting the content database. There are instructions on how to this provided you have multiple site collections and not a single massive one.
Also check your SharePoint databases are in good shape. Have you tried DBCC CHECKDB? Do you have SQL Server maintenance plans configured to reindex and reduce fragmentation? Read these resources on TechNet (particularly the database maintenance article) for details.
Finally, see if there is anything more you can do to isolate the SQL Server as the problem. Are there any other applications with databases on the same SQL Server and are they having problems? Are you running performance monitoring on the SQL Server or SharePoint servers that show any bottlenecks?
Backup the production database to dev and attach it to your dev SharePoint server.
Try and create a site. If it does not take forever to create a site, you can assume there is a problem with the Prod database.
Despite that, at 100gig, you are running up to the limit for a content database and should be planning to put content into more than one. you will know why when you try and backup the database. Searching should also be starting to take a good long time now.
So long term you are going to have to plan on splitting your websites out into different content databases.
--Responses--
Yeah, database size is all just about SQL server handling it. 100GB is just the "any more than this and it starts to be a pain" rule of thumb. Full Search crawls will also start a while.
Given that you do not have access to the production database and that creating a sub-site is primarily a database operation, there is nothing you can really do to figure out what the issue is.
You could try creating a subsite while doing a trace of the Dev database and look at the tables those commands reference to see if there is a smoking gun, but without production access you are really hampered.
Does the production system server pages and documents at a reasonable speed?
See if you can start getting some stats from the database during the creation, find out what work is being done. SQL has some great tools for that now.