Performance de-grade after migrating to ASE 15 from 12.5.3...

Hi,



I would like to take your help in exploring all the options
to bring back the performance at least to old state for a
couple of stored procedures involved in batch processing
hamper the performance.

As the Application team is not allowing any downtime to
bounce the server, need as much as possible session based
settings. I have take this as a challenge as the team is
thinking (confirming?) ASE 15 is not a better product and
comparing the performance gain after upgrading to Oracle
11g.



Please help me in resolving this, below cited is the typical
Query in the stored procedure.



Note: This stored procedures response time in 12.5.3 is 4
Hours, where as ASE 15 is taking around 9 Hours...



Rowcount:

ABC- 150

XYZ - 10

TBLC - 100

BFS - 100000





Select distinct BFS.SETID,

BFS.CUST_ID,

TBLC.CUST_ID + TBLC.CA_LVL_1_ID,

XYZ.bill_level_1,

XYZ.bill_level_2,

XYZ.bill_level_3,

XYZ.bill_level_4,

TRG.CA_CONTRACT_FRM_DT,

TRG.CA_CONTRACT_TO_DT,

XYZ.health_cov_class,

BFS.CA_HEALTH_COVG_CLS,

BFS.CA_FEE_TYPE_ID,

BFS.CA_BASIS,

BFS.CA_UNIT_OF_MEASURE,

BFS.CA_RATE_AMOUNT,

TBLC.CA_SORT_ID,

XYZ.pdbl_id, 1

from TRG, XYZ , TBLC, BFS

where BFS.CUST_ID =3d @cust_id

and TBLC.CUST_ID =3d @cust_id

and XYZ.ps_customer_number =3d @cust_id

and TBLC.SETID =3d BFS.SETID

and TBLC.CUST_ID =3d BFS.CUST_ID

and TBLC.CA_ADMIN_CNTRV =3d BFS.CA_ADMIN_CNTRV

and TRG.CA_CONTRACT_FRM_DT <=3d TBLC.CA_CONTRACT_FRM_DT

and TRG.CA_CONTRACT_TO_DT >=3d TBLC.CA_CONTRACT_TO_DT

and TRG.CA_CONTRACT_FRM_DT <=3d BFS.CA_CONTRACT_FRM_DT

and TRG.CA_CONTRACT_TO_DT >=3d BFS.CA_CONTRACT_TO_DT

and XYZ.basis =3d BFS.CA_BASIS

and XYZ.ps_customer_number =3d TRG.CUST_ID

and XYZ.bill_level_1 =3d TBLC.CA_LVL_1_ID

and TBLC.CA_LVL_2_ID =3d ' '

and TBLC.CA_LVL_3_ID =3d ' '

and TBLC.CA_LVL_4_ID =3d ' '

and ( ( substring(XYZ.pdbl_id,1,1) in ("A", "C")

/* SSERV00007698 - changes start here */

and BFS.CA_FEE_TYPE_ID in ("AENR", "ALMT")

/* SSERV00007698 - changes Ends here */

and XYZ.health_cov_class =3d BFS.CA_HEALTH_COVG_CLS)

or ( substring(XYZ.pdbl_id,1,1) =3d "F"

and BFS.CA_FEE_TYPE_ID in ("DNTL","DRUG","VISN","HOT")

and XYZ.health_cov_class in ("DN", "RX", "VS", "HT")

and XYZ.health_cov_class =3d BFS.CA_HEALTH_COVG_CLS)

or ( exists (select 1 from fin_shared..PS_BFS_GEN_TBLC GEN

where GEN.CUST_ID =3d TRG.CUST_ID

and GEN.CA_CONTRACT_FRM_DT <=3d TRG.CA_MON_BEGN_DT

and GEN.CA_CONTRACT_TO_DT > TRG.CA_MON_BEGN_DT

and XYZ.health_cov_class =3d "SL"

and substring(XYZ.pdbl_id,1,1) =3d "F"

and BFS.CA_HEALTH_COVG_CLS =3d "MD"

and ( ( GEN.CA_STOP_LOSS_INDIC IN ('B', 'S')

and BFS.CA_FEE_TYPE_ID =3d "SSL")

or ( GEN.CA_STOP_LOSS_INDIC IN ('B', 'A')

and BFS.CA_FEE_TYPE_ID =3d "ASL")))))



I have the following options but could not implement as per
policy:

=b7         Trace Flag: 757 and abstract plans loading
can=92t be implemented.

=b7         Compatibility mode on is not helping much.



Thanks a Ton in advance...

Viswa
0
Viswam
9/14/2010 3:08:01 PM
sybase.ase.performance+tuning 2395 articles. 0 followers. Follow

6 Replies
647 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 27

We really need to see the actual query plans (before, and after), as well
as the IOs generated before we can come up with any ideas.

Michael



On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 08:08:01 -0700, Viswam wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> 
> 
> I would like to take your help in exploring all the options
> to bring back the performance at least to old state for a
> couple of stored procedures involved in batch processing
> hamper the performance.
> 
> As the Application team is not allowing any downtime to
> bounce the server, need as much as possible session based
> settings. I have take this as a challenge as the team is
> thinking (confirming?) ASE 15 is not a better product and
> comparing the performance gain after upgrading to Oracle
> 11g.
> 
> 
> 
> Please help me in resolving this, below cited is the typical
> Query in the stored procedure.
> 
> 
> 
> Note: This stored procedures response time in 12.5.3 is 4
> Hours, where as ASE 15 is taking around 9 Hours...
> 
> 
> 
> Rowcount:
> 
> ABC- 150
> 
> XYZ - 10
> 
> TBLC - 100
> 
> BFS - 100000
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Select distinct BFS.SETID,
> 
> BFS.CUST_ID,
> 
> TBLC.CUST_ID + TBLC.CA_LVL_1_ID,
> 
> XYZ.bill_level_1,
> 
> XYZ.bill_level_2,
> 
> XYZ.bill_level_3,
> 
> XYZ.bill_level_4,
> 
> TRG.CA_CONTRACT_FRM_DT,
> 
> TRG.CA_CONTRACT_TO_DT,
> 
> XYZ.health_cov_class,
> 
> BFS.CA_HEALTH_COVG_CLS,
> 
> BFS.CA_FEE_TYPE_ID,
> 
> BFS.CA_BASIS,
> 
> BFS.CA_UNIT_OF_MEASURE,
> 
> BFS.CA_RATE_AMOUNT,
> 
> TBLC.CA_SORT_ID,
> 
> XYZ.pdbl_id, 1
> 
> from TRG, XYZ , TBLC, BFS
> 
> where BFS.CUST_ID = @cust_id
> 
> and TBLC.CUST_ID = @cust_id
> 
> and XYZ.ps_customer_number = @cust_id
> 
> and TBLC.SETID = BFS.SETID
> 
> and TBLC.CUST_ID = BFS.CUST_ID
> 
> and TBLC.CA_ADMIN_CNTRV = BFS.CA_ADMIN_CNTRV
> 
> and TRG.CA_CONTRACT_FRM_DT <= TBLC.CA_CONTRACT_FRM_DT
> 
> and TRG.CA_CONTRACT_TO_DT >= TBLC.CA_CONTRACT_TO_DT
> 
> and TRG.CA_CONTRACT_FRM_DT <= BFS.CA_CONTRACT_FRM_DT
> 
> and TRG.CA_CONTRACT_TO_DT >= BFS.CA_CONTRACT_TO_DT
> 
> and XYZ.basis = BFS.CA_BASIS
> 
> and XYZ.ps_customer_number = TRG.CUST_ID
> 
> and XYZ.bill_level_1 = TBLC.CA_LVL_1_ID
> 
> and TBLC.CA_LVL_2_ID = ' '
> 
> and TBLC.CA_LVL_3_ID = ' '
> 
> and TBLC.CA_LVL_4_ID = ' '
> 
> and ( ( substring(XYZ.pdbl_id,1,1) in ("A", "C")
> 
> /* SSERV00007698 - changes start here */
> 
> and BFS.CA_FEE_TYPE_ID in ("AENR", "ALMT")
> 
> /* SSERV00007698 - changes Ends here */
> 
> and XYZ.health_cov_class = BFS.CA_HEALTH_COVG_CLS)
> 
> or ( substring(XYZ.pdbl_id,1,1) = "F"
> 
> and BFS.CA_FEE_TYPE_ID in ("DNTL","DRUG","VISN","HOT")
> 
> and XYZ.health_cov_class in ("DN", "RX", "VS", "HT")
> 
> and XYZ.health_cov_class = BFS.CA_HEALTH_COVG_CLS)
> 
> or ( exists (select 1 from fin_shared..PS_BFS_GEN_TBLC GEN
> 
> where GEN.CUST_ID = TRG.CUST_ID
> 
> and GEN.CA_CONTRACT_FRM_DT <= TRG.CA_MON_BEGN_DT
> 
> and GEN.CA_CONTRACT_TO_DT > TRG.CA_MON_BEGN_DT
> 
> and XYZ.health_cov_class = "SL"
> 
> and substring(XYZ.pdbl_id,1,1) = "F"
> 
> and BFS.CA_HEALTH_COVG_CLS = "MD"
> 
> and ( ( GEN.CA_STOP_LOSS_INDIC IN ('B', 'S')
> 
> and BFS.CA_FEE_TYPE_ID = "SSL")
> 
> or ( GEN.CA_STOP_LOSS_INDIC IN ('B', 'A')
> 
> and BFS.CA_FEE_TYPE_ID = "ASL")))))
> 
> 
> 
> I have the following options but could not implement as per
> policy:
> 
> �         Trace Flag: 757 and abstract plans loading
> can�t be implemented.
> 
> �         Compatibility mode on is not helping much.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks a Ton in advance...
> 
> Viswa

0
Michael
9/14/2010 6:10:30 PM
Also, complete table structures (sp_help <table_name>) and sizes (sp_spaceused <table_name>,1) would help.

If the rowcounts are accurate (10 - 100,000 per table) then there's no reason why this query shouldn't be 
tunable/rewritable to run a *LOT* faster than 4 hours.

Michael Peppler [Team Sybase] wrote:
> We really need to see the actual query plans (before, and after), as well
> as the IOs generated before we can come up with any ideas.
> 
> Michael
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 08:08:01 -0700, Viswam wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>>
>> I would like to take your help in exploring all the options
>> to bring back the performance at least to old state for a
>> couple of stored procedures involved in batch processing
>> hamper the performance.
>>
>> As the Application team is not allowing any downtime to
>> bounce the server, need as much as possible session based
>> settings. I have take this as a challenge as the team is
>> thinking (confirming?) ASE 15 is not a better product and
>> comparing the performance gain after upgrading to Oracle
>> 11g.
>>
>>
>>
>> Please help me in resolving this, below cited is the typical
>> Query in the stored procedure.
>>
>>
>>
>> Note: This stored procedures response time in 12.5.3 is 4
>> Hours, where as ASE 15 is taking around 9 Hours...
>>
>>
>>
>> Rowcount:
>>
>> ABC- 150
>>
>> XYZ - 10
>>
>> TBLC - 100
>>
>> BFS - 100000
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Select distinct BFS.SETID,
>>
>> BFS.CUST_ID,
>>
>> TBLC.CUST_ID + TBLC.CA_LVL_1_ID,
>>
>> XYZ.bill_level_1,
>>
>> XYZ.bill_level_2,
>>
>> XYZ.bill_level_3,
>>
>> XYZ.bill_level_4,
>>
>> TRG.CA_CONTRACT_FRM_DT,
>>
>> TRG.CA_CONTRACT_TO_DT,
>>
>> XYZ.health_cov_class,
>>
>> BFS.CA_HEALTH_COVG_CLS,
>>
>> BFS.CA_FEE_TYPE_ID,
>>
>> BFS.CA_BASIS,
>>
>> BFS.CA_UNIT_OF_MEASURE,
>>
>> BFS.CA_RATE_AMOUNT,
>>
>> TBLC.CA_SORT_ID,
>>
>> XYZ.pdbl_id, 1
>>
>> from TRG, XYZ , TBLC, BFS
>>
>> where BFS.CUST_ID = @cust_id
>>
>> and TBLC.CUST_ID = @cust_id
>>
>> and XYZ.ps_customer_number = @cust_id
>>
>> and TBLC.SETID = BFS.SETID
>>
>> and TBLC.CUST_ID = BFS.CUST_ID
>>
>> and TBLC.CA_ADMIN_CNTRV = BFS.CA_ADMIN_CNTRV
>>
>> and TRG.CA_CONTRACT_FRM_DT <= TBLC.CA_CONTRACT_FRM_DT
>>
>> and TRG.CA_CONTRACT_TO_DT >= TBLC.CA_CONTRACT_TO_DT
>>
>> and TRG.CA_CONTRACT_FRM_DT <= BFS.CA_CONTRACT_FRM_DT
>>
>> and TRG.CA_CONTRACT_TO_DT >= BFS.CA_CONTRACT_TO_DT
>>
>> and XYZ.basis = BFS.CA_BASIS
>>
>> and XYZ.ps_customer_number = TRG.CUST_ID
>>
>> and XYZ.bill_level_1 = TBLC.CA_LVL_1_ID
>>
>> and TBLC.CA_LVL_2_ID = ' '
>>
>> and TBLC.CA_LVL_3_ID = ' '
>>
>> and TBLC.CA_LVL_4_ID = ' '
>>
>> and ( ( substring(XYZ.pdbl_id,1,1) in ("A", "C")
>>
>> /* SSERV00007698 - changes start here */
>>
>> and BFS.CA_FEE_TYPE_ID in ("AENR", "ALMT")
>>
>> /* SSERV00007698 - changes Ends here */
>>
>> and XYZ.health_cov_class = BFS.CA_HEALTH_COVG_CLS)
>>
>> or ( substring(XYZ.pdbl_id,1,1) = "F"
>>
>> and BFS.CA_FEE_TYPE_ID in ("DNTL","DRUG","VISN","HOT")
>>
>> and XYZ.health_cov_class in ("DN", "RX", "VS", "HT")
>>
>> and XYZ.health_cov_class = BFS.CA_HEALTH_COVG_CLS)
>>
>> or ( exists (select 1 from fin_shared..PS_BFS_GEN_TBLC GEN
>>
>> where GEN.CUST_ID = TRG.CUST_ID
>>
>> and GEN.CA_CONTRACT_FRM_DT <= TRG.CA_MON_BEGN_DT
>>
>> and GEN.CA_CONTRACT_TO_DT > TRG.CA_MON_BEGN_DT
>>
>> and XYZ.health_cov_class = "SL"
>>
>> and substring(XYZ.pdbl_id,1,1) = "F"
>>
>> and BFS.CA_HEALTH_COVG_CLS = "MD"
>>
>> and ( ( GEN.CA_STOP_LOSS_INDIC IN ('B', 'S')
>>
>> and BFS.CA_FEE_TYPE_ID = "SSL")
>>
>> or ( GEN.CA_STOP_LOSS_INDIC IN ('B', 'A')
>>
>> and BFS.CA_FEE_TYPE_ID = "ASL")))))
>>
>>
>>
>> I have the following options but could not implement as per
>> policy:
>>
>> �         Trace Flag: 757 and abstract plans loading
>> can�t be implemented.
>>
>> �         Compatibility mode on is not helping much.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks a Ton in advance...
>>
>> Viswa
> 
0
Mark
9/14/2010 6:22:46 PM
Hi,

Thank you so much Peppler and Parsons, as usual your
help/support encourage us to work more and help more.

Sorry they have posted UAT statistics to me. It seems the
prod server have huge data like Millions of Rows and prod
DBAs are not giving access to this Team, and wanted to
propose recommendations to DBA manager.

BTW, When they are running these batch processes call stored
procedures (All the procs created with recompile option)
very few or no other users/applications access the data.

In the above scenario, do you recommend to change
Optimization goal to DSS, currently it is mix.

Thanks,
Viswam



> Also, complete table structures (sp_help <table_name>) and
> sizes (sp_spaceused <table_name>,1) would help.
>
> If the rowcounts are accurate (10 - 100,000 per table)
> then there's no reason why this query shouldn't be
> tunable/rewritable to run a *LOT* faster than 4 hours.
>
> Michael Peppler [Team Sybase] wrote:
> > We really need to see the actual query plans (before,
> > and after), as well as the IOs generated before we can
> > come up with any ideas.
> > Michael
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 08:08:01 -0700, Viswam wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> I would like to take your help in exploring all the
> options >> to bring back the performance at least to old
> state for a >> couple of stored procedures involved in
> batch processing >> hamper the performance.
> >>
> >> As the Application team is not allowing any downtime to
> >> bounce the server, need as much as possible session
> based >> settings. I have take this as a challenge as the
> team is >> thinking (confirming?) ASE 15 is not a better
> product and >> comparing the performance gain after
> upgrading to Oracle >> 11g.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Please help me in resolving this, below cited is the
> typical >> Query in the stored procedure.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Note: This stored procedures response time in 12.5.3 is
> 4 >> Hours, where as ASE 15 is taking around 9 Hours...
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Rowcount:
> >>
> >> ABC- 150
> >>
> >> XYZ - 10
> >>
> >> TBLC - 100
> >>
> >> BFS - 100000
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Select distinct BFS.SETID,
> >>
> >> BFS.CUST_ID,
> >>
> >> TBLC.CUST_ID + TBLC.CA_LVL_1_ID,
> >>
> >> XYZ.bill_level_1,
> >>
> >> XYZ.bill_level_2,
> >>
> >> XYZ.bill_level_3,
> >>
> >> XYZ.bill_level_4,
> >>
> >> TRG.CA_CONTRACT_FRM_DT,
> >>
> >> TRG.CA_CONTRACT_TO_DT,
> >>
> >> XYZ.health_cov_class,
> >>
> >> BFS.CA_HEALTH_COVG_CLS,
> >>
> >> BFS.CA_FEE_TYPE_ID,
> >>
> >> BFS.CA_BASIS,
> >>
> >> BFS.CA_UNIT_OF_MEASURE,
> >>
> >> BFS.CA_RATE_AMOUNT,
> >>
> >> TBLC.CA_SORT_ID,
> >>
> >> XYZ.pdbl_id, 1
> >>
> >> from TRG, XYZ , TBLC, BFS
> >>
> >> where BFS.CUST_ID =3d @cust_id
> >>
> >> and TBLC.CUST_ID =3d @cust_id
> >>
> >> and XYZ.ps_customer_number =3d @cust_id
> >>
> >> and TBLC.SETID =3d BFS.SETID
> >>
> >> and TBLC.CUST_ID =3d BFS.CUST_ID
> >>
> >> and TBLC.CA_ADMIN_CNTRV =3d BFS.CA_ADMIN_CNTRV
> >>
> >> and TRG.CA_CONTRACT_FRM_DT <=3d TBLC.CA_CONTRACT_FRM_DT
> >>
> >> and TRG.CA_CONTRACT_TO_DT >=3d TBLC.CA_CONTRACT_TO_DT
> >>
> >> and TRG.CA_CONTRACT_FRM_DT <=3d BFS.CA_CONTRACT_FRM_DT
> >>
> >> and TRG.CA_CONTRACT_TO_DT >=3d BFS.CA_CONTRACT_TO_DT
> >>
> >> and XYZ.basis =3d BFS.CA_BASIS
> >>
> >> and XYZ.ps_customer_number =3d TRG.CUST_ID
> >>
> >> and XYZ.bill_level_1 =3d TBLC.CA_LVL_1_ID
> >>
> >> and TBLC.CA_LVL_2_ID =3d ' '
> >>
> >> and TBLC.CA_LVL_3_ID =3d ' '
> >>
> >> and TBLC.CA_LVL_4_ID =3d ' '
> >>
> >> and ( ( substring(XYZ.pdbl_id,1,1) in ("A", "C")
> >>
> >> /* SSERV00007698 - changes start here */
> >>
> >> and BFS.CA_FEE_TYPE_ID in ("AENR", "ALMT")
> >>
> >> /* SSERV00007698 - changes Ends here */
> >>
> >> and XYZ.health_cov_class =3d BFS.CA_HEALTH_COVG_CLS)
> >>
> >> or ( substring(XYZ.pdbl_id,1,1) =3d "F"
> >>
> >> and BFS.CA_FEE_TYPE_ID in ("DNTL","DRUG","VISN","HOT")
> >>
> >> and XYZ.health_cov_class in ("DN", "RX", "VS", "HT")
> >>
> >> and XYZ.health_cov_class =3d BFS.CA_HEALTH_COVG_CLS)
> >>
> >> or ( exists (select 1 from fin_shared..PS_BFS_GEN_TBLC
> GEN >>
> >> where GEN.CUST_ID =3d TRG.CUST_ID
> >>
> >> and GEN.CA_CONTRACT_FRM_DT <=3d TRG.CA_MON_BEGN_DT
> >>
> >> and GEN.CA_CONTRACT_TO_DT > TRG.CA_MON_BEGN_DT
> >>
> >> and XYZ.health_cov_class =3d "SL"
> >>
> >> and substring(XYZ.pdbl_id,1,1) =3d "F"
> >>
> >> and BFS.CA_HEALTH_COVG_CLS =3d "MD"
> >>
> >> and ( ( GEN.CA_STOP_LOSS_INDIC IN ('B', 'S')
> >>
> >> and BFS.CA_FEE_TYPE_ID =3d "SSL")
> >>
> >> or ( GEN.CA_STOP_LOSS_INDIC IN ('B', 'A')
> >>
> >> and BFS.CA_FEE_TYPE_ID =3d "ASL")))))
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> I have the following options but could not implement as
> per >> policy:
> >>
> >> =b7         Trace Flag: 757 and abstract plans loading
> >> can=92t be implemented.
> >>
> >> =b7         Compatibility mode on is not helping much.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Thanks a Ton in advance...
> >>
> >> Viswa
> >
0
Viswam
9/15/2010 8:15:04 PM
Not enough info to make any suggestions on how to improve the performance of the query.


Viswam wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Thank you so much Peppler and Parsons, as usual your
> help/support encourage us to work more and help more.
> 
> Sorry they have posted UAT statistics to me. It seems the
> prod server have huge data like Millions of Rows and prod
> DBAs are not giving access to this Team, and wanted to
> propose recommendations to DBA manager.
> 
> BTW, When they are running these batch processes call stored
> procedures (All the procs created with recompile option)
> very few or no other users/applications access the data.
> 
> In the above scenario, do you recommend to change
> Optimization goal to DSS, currently it is mix.
> 
> Thanks,
> Viswam
> 
> 
> 
>> Also, complete table structures (sp_help <table_name>) and
>> sizes (sp_spaceused <table_name>,1) would help.
>>
>> If the rowcounts are accurate (10 - 100,000 per table)
>> then there's no reason why this query shouldn't be
>> tunable/rewritable to run a *LOT* faster than 4 hours.
>>
>> Michael Peppler [Team Sybase] wrote:
>>> We really need to see the actual query plans (before,
>>> and after), as well as the IOs generated before we can
>>> come up with any ideas.
>>> Michael
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 08:08:01 -0700, Viswam wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I would like to take your help in exploring all the
>> options >> to bring back the performance at least to old
>> state for a >> couple of stored procedures involved in
>> batch processing >> hamper the performance.
>>>> As the Application team is not allowing any downtime to
>>>> bounce the server, need as much as possible session
>> based >> settings. I have take this as a challenge as the
>> team is >> thinking (confirming?) ASE 15 is not a better
>> product and >> comparing the performance gain after
>> upgrading to Oracle >> 11g.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Please help me in resolving this, below cited is the
>> typical >> Query in the stored procedure.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Note: This stored procedures response time in 12.5.3 is
>> 4 >> Hours, where as ASE 15 is taking around 9 Hours...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Rowcount:
>>>>
>>>> ABC- 150
>>>>
>>>> XYZ - 10
>>>>
>>>> TBLC - 100
>>>>
>>>> BFS - 100000
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Select distinct BFS.SETID,
>>>>
>>>> BFS.CUST_ID,
>>>>
>>>> TBLC.CUST_ID + TBLC.CA_LVL_1_ID,
>>>>
>>>> XYZ.bill_level_1,
>>>>
>>>> XYZ.bill_level_2,
>>>>
>>>> XYZ.bill_level_3,
>>>>
>>>> XYZ.bill_level_4,
>>>>
>>>> TRG.CA_CONTRACT_FRM_DT,
>>>>
>>>> TRG.CA_CONTRACT_TO_DT,
>>>>
>>>> XYZ.health_cov_class,
>>>>
>>>> BFS.CA_HEALTH_COVG_CLS,
>>>>
>>>> BFS.CA_FEE_TYPE_ID,
>>>>
>>>> BFS.CA_BASIS,
>>>>
>>>> BFS.CA_UNIT_OF_MEASURE,
>>>>
>>>> BFS.CA_RATE_AMOUNT,
>>>>
>>>> TBLC.CA_SORT_ID,
>>>>
>>>> XYZ.pdbl_id, 1
>>>>
>>>> from TRG, XYZ , TBLC, BFS
>>>>
>>>> where BFS.CUST_ID = @cust_id
>>>>
>>>> and TBLC.CUST_ID = @cust_id
>>>>
>>>> and XYZ.ps_customer_number = @cust_id
>>>>
>>>> and TBLC.SETID = BFS.SETID
>>>>
>>>> and TBLC.CUST_ID = BFS.CUST_ID
>>>>
>>>> and TBLC.CA_ADMIN_CNTRV = BFS.CA_ADMIN_CNTRV
>>>>
>>>> and TRG.CA_CONTRACT_FRM_DT <= TBLC.CA_CONTRACT_FRM_DT
>>>>
>>>> and TRG.CA_CONTRACT_TO_DT >= TBLC.CA_CONTRACT_TO_DT
>>>>
>>>> and TRG.CA_CONTRACT_FRM_DT <= BFS.CA_CONTRACT_FRM_DT
>>>>
>>>> and TRG.CA_CONTRACT_TO_DT >= BFS.CA_CONTRACT_TO_DT
>>>>
>>>> and XYZ.basis = BFS.CA_BASIS
>>>>
>>>> and XYZ.ps_customer_number = TRG.CUST_ID
>>>>
>>>> and XYZ.bill_level_1 = TBLC.CA_LVL_1_ID
>>>>
>>>> and TBLC.CA_LVL_2_ID = ' '
>>>>
>>>> and TBLC.CA_LVL_3_ID = ' '
>>>>
>>>> and TBLC.CA_LVL_4_ID = ' '
>>>>
>>>> and ( ( substring(XYZ.pdbl_id,1,1) in ("A", "C")
>>>>
>>>> /* SSERV00007698 - changes start here */
>>>>
>>>> and BFS.CA_FEE_TYPE_ID in ("AENR", "ALMT")
>>>>
>>>> /* SSERV00007698 - changes Ends here */
>>>>
>>>> and XYZ.health_cov_class = BFS.CA_HEALTH_COVG_CLS)
>>>>
>>>> or ( substring(XYZ.pdbl_id,1,1) = "F"
>>>>
>>>> and BFS.CA_FEE_TYPE_ID in ("DNTL","DRUG","VISN","HOT")
>>>>
>>>> and XYZ.health_cov_class in ("DN", "RX", "VS", "HT")
>>>>
>>>> and XYZ.health_cov_class = BFS.CA_HEALTH_COVG_CLS)
>>>>
>>>> or ( exists (select 1 from fin_shared..PS_BFS_GEN_TBLC
>> GEN >>
>>>> where GEN.CUST_ID = TRG.CUST_ID
>>>>
>>>> and GEN.CA_CONTRACT_FRM_DT <= TRG.CA_MON_BEGN_DT
>>>>
>>>> and GEN.CA_CONTRACT_TO_DT > TRG.CA_MON_BEGN_DT
>>>>
>>>> and XYZ.health_cov_class = "SL"
>>>>
>>>> and substring(XYZ.pdbl_id,1,1) = "F"
>>>>
>>>> and BFS.CA_HEALTH_COVG_CLS = "MD"
>>>>
>>>> and ( ( GEN.CA_STOP_LOSS_INDIC IN ('B', 'S')
>>>>
>>>> and BFS.CA_FEE_TYPE_ID = "SSL")
>>>>
>>>> or ( GEN.CA_STOP_LOSS_INDIC IN ('B', 'A')
>>>>
>>>> and BFS.CA_FEE_TYPE_ID = "ASL")))))
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I have the following options but could not implement as
>> per >> policy:
>>>> �         Trace Flag: 757 and abstract plans loading
>>>> can�t be implemented.
>>>>
>>>> �         Compatibility mode on is not helping much.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks a Ton in advance...
>>>>
>>>> Viswa
0
Mark
9/15/2010 8:53:40 PM
Mark,

Is the optimization goal "allrows_dss" would improve the
performance on an ASE which was processing huge data i.e. 4
tables involved with millions of rows and joined together
and uses a distinct clause on ASE 15.0.3 (No trace flags
used).

Current goal is "allrows_mix", I have a chance/window to
test the processes but for only 1 goal, so please suggest me
which goal to be used/tested "allrows_oltp" or
"allrows_dss".

Thanks,
Viswam


> Not enough info to make any suggestions on how to improve
> the performance of the query.
>
>
> Viswam wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Thank you so much Peppler and Parsons, as usual your
> > help/support encourage us to work more and help more.
> >
> > Sorry they have posted UAT statistics to me. It seems
> > the prod server have huge data like Millions of Rows and
> > prod DBAs are not giving access to this Team, and wanted
> > to propose recommendations to DBA manager.
> >
> > BTW, When they are running these batch processes call
> > stored procedures (All the procs created with recompile
> > option) very few or no other users/applications access
> > the data.
> > In the above scenario, do you recommend to change
> > Optimization goal to DSS, currently it is mix.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Viswam
> >
> >
> >
> >> Also, complete table structures (sp_help <table_name>)
> and >> sizes (sp_spaceused <table_name>,1) would help.
> >>
> >> If the rowcounts are accurate (10 - 100,000 per table)
> >> then there's no reason why this query shouldn't be
> >> tunable/rewritable to run a *LOT* faster than 4 hours.
> >>
> >> Michael Peppler [Team Sybase] wrote:
> >>> We really need to see the actual query plans (before,
> >>> and after), as well as the IOs generated before we can
> >>> come up with any ideas.
> >>> Michael
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 08:08:01 -0700, Viswam wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Hi,
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I would like to take your help in exploring all the
> >> options >> to bring back the performance at least to
> old >> state for a >> couple of stored procedures involved
> in >> batch processing >> hamper the performance.
> >>>> As the Application team is not allowing any downtime
> to >>>> bounce the server, need as much as possible
> session >> based >> settings. I have take this as a
> challenge as the >> team is >> thinking (confirming?) ASE
> 15 is not a better >> product and >> comparing the
> performance gain after >> upgrading to Oracle >> 11g.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Please help me in resolving this, below cited is the
> >> typical >> Query in the stored procedure.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Note: This stored procedures response time in 12.5.3
> is >> 4 >> Hours, where as ASE 15 is taking around 9
> Hours... >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Rowcount:
> >>>>
> >>>> ABC- 150
> >>>>
> >>>> XYZ - 10
> >>>>
> >>>> TBLC - 100
> >>>>
> >>>> BFS - 100000
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Select distinct BFS.SETID,
> >>>>
> >>>> BFS.CUST_ID,
> >>>>
> >>>> TBLC.CUST_ID + TBLC.CA_LVL_1_ID,
> >>>>
> >>>> XYZ.bill_level_1,
> >>>>
> >>>> XYZ.bill_level_2,
> >>>>
> >>>> XYZ.bill_level_3,
> >>>>
> >>>> XYZ.bill_level_4,
> >>>>
> >>>> TRG.CA_CONTRACT_FRM_DT,
> >>>>
> >>>> TRG.CA_CONTRACT_TO_DT,
> >>>>
> >>>> XYZ.health_cov_class,
> >>>>
> >>>> BFS.CA_HEALTH_COVG_CLS,
> >>>>
> >>>> BFS.CA_FEE_TYPE_ID,
> >>>>
> >>>> BFS.CA_BASIS,
> >>>>
> >>>> BFS.CA_UNIT_OF_MEASURE,
> >>>>
> >>>> BFS.CA_RATE_AMOUNT,
> >>>>
> >>>> TBLC.CA_SORT_ID,
> >>>>
> >>>> XYZ.pdbl_id, 1
> >>>>
> >>>> from TRG, XYZ , TBLC, BFS
> >>>>
> >>>> where BFS.CUST_ID =3d @cust_id
> >>>>
> >>>> and TBLC.CUST_ID =3d @cust_id
> >>>>
> >>>> and XYZ.ps_customer_number =3d @cust_id
> >>>>
> >>>> and TBLC.SETID =3d BFS.SETID
> >>>>
> >>>> and TBLC.CUST_ID =3d BFS.CUST_ID
> >>>>
> >>>> and TBLC.CA_ADMIN_CNTRV =3d BFS.CA_ADMIN_CNTRV
> >>>>
> >>>> and TRG.CA_CONTRACT_FRM_DT <=3d
TBLC.CA_CONTRACT_FRM_DT
> >>>>
> >>>> and TRG.CA_CONTRACT_TO_DT >=3d TBLC.CA_CONTRACT_TO_DT
> >>>>
> >>>> and TRG.CA_CONTRACT_FRM_DT <=3d
BFS.CA_CONTRACT_FRM_DT
> >>>>
> >>>> and TRG.CA_CONTRACT_TO_DT >=3d BFS.CA_CONTRACT_TO_DT
> >>>>
> >>>> and XYZ.basis =3d BFS.CA_BASIS
> >>>>
> >>>> and XYZ.ps_customer_number =3d TRG.CUST_ID
> >>>>
> >>>> and XYZ.bill_level_1 =3d TBLC.CA_LVL_1_ID
> >>>>
> >>>> and TBLC.CA_LVL_2_ID =3d ' '
> >>>>
> >>>> and TBLC.CA_LVL_3_ID =3d ' '
> >>>>
> >>>> and TBLC.CA_LVL_4_ID =3d ' '
> >>>>
> >>>> and ( ( substring(XYZ.pdbl_id,1,1) in ("A", "C")
> >>>>
> >>>> /* SSERV00007698 - changes start here */
> >>>>
> >>>> and BFS.CA_FEE_TYPE_ID in ("AENR", "ALMT")
> >>>>
> >>>> /* SSERV00007698 - changes Ends here */
> >>>>
> >>>> and XYZ.health_cov_class =3d BFS.CA_HEALTH_COVG_CLS)
> >>>>
> >>>> or ( substring(XYZ.pdbl_id,1,1) =3d "F"
> >>>>
> >>>> and BFS.CA_FEE_TYPE_ID in ("DNTL","DRUG","VISN"
> ,"HOT") >>>>
> >>>> and XYZ.health_cov_class in ("DN", "RX", "VS", "HT")
> >>>>
> >>>> and XYZ.health_cov_class =3d BFS.CA_HEALTH_COVG_CLS)
> >>>>
> >>>> or ( exists (select 1 from
> fin_shared..PS_BFS_GEN_TBLC >> GEN >>
> >>>> where GEN.CUST_ID =3d TRG.CUST_ID
> >>>>
> >>>> and GEN.CA_CONTRACT_FRM_DT <=3d TRG.CA_MON_BEGN_DT
> >>>>
> >>>> and GEN.CA_CONTRACT_TO_DT > TRG.CA_MON_BEGN_DT
> >>>>
> >>>> and XYZ.health_cov_class =3d "SL"
> >>>>
> >>>> and substring(XYZ.pdbl_id,1,1) =3d "F"
> >>>>
> >>>> and BFS.CA_HEALTH_COVG_CLS =3d "MD"
> >>>>
> >>>> and ( ( GEN.CA_STOP_LOSS_INDIC IN ('B', 'S')
> >>>>
> >>>> and BFS.CA_FEE_TYPE_ID =3d "SSL")
> >>>>
> >>>> or ( GEN.CA_STOP_LOSS_INDIC IN ('B', 'A')
> >>>>
> >>>> and BFS.CA_FEE_TYPE_ID =3d "ASL")))))
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I have the following options but could not implement
> as >> per >> policy:
> >>>> =b7         Trace Flag: 757 and abstract plans
loading
> >>>> can=92t be implemented.
> >>>>
> >>>> =b7         Compatibility mode on is not helping
much.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks a Ton in advance...
> >>>>
> >>>> Viswa
0
Viswam
9/16/2010 3:38:28 PM
You still haven't provide one bit of useful info about the query in question.

I can *guess* at a dozen potential problems and their associated solutions ... and none of them have anything to do with 
optgoals.

You're more than welcome to try changing the optgoal ... you might get lucky ... kinda like throwing darts with a 
blindfold on.




Viswam wrote:
> Mark,
> 
> Is the optimization goal "allrows_dss" would improve the
> performance on an ASE which was processing huge data i.e. 4
> tables involved with millions of rows and joined together
> and uses a distinct clause on ASE 15.0.3 (No trace flags
> used).
> 
> Current goal is "allrows_mix", I have a chance/window to
> test the processes but for only 1 goal, so please suggest me
> which goal to be used/tested "allrows_oltp" or
> "allrows_dss".
> 
> Thanks,
> Viswam
> 
> 
>> Not enough info to make any suggestions on how to improve
>> the performance of the query.
>>
>>
>> Viswam wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Thank you so much Peppler and Parsons, as usual your
>>> help/support encourage us to work more and help more.
>>>
>>> Sorry they have posted UAT statistics to me. It seems
>>> the prod server have huge data like Millions of Rows and
>>> prod DBAs are not giving access to this Team, and wanted
>>> to propose recommendations to DBA manager.
>>>
>>> BTW, When they are running these batch processes call
>>> stored procedures (All the procs created with recompile
>>> option) very few or no other users/applications access
>>> the data.
>>> In the above scenario, do you recommend to change
>>> Optimization goal to DSS, currently it is mix.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Viswam
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Also, complete table structures (sp_help <table_name>)
>> and >> sizes (sp_spaceused <table_name>,1) would help.
>>>> If the rowcounts are accurate (10 - 100,000 per table)
>>>> then there's no reason why this query shouldn't be
>>>> tunable/rewritable to run a *LOT* faster than 4 hours.
>>>>
>>>> Michael Peppler [Team Sybase] wrote:
>>>>> We really need to see the actual query plans (before,
>>>>> and after), as well as the IOs generated before we can
>>>>> come up with any ideas.
>>>>> Michael
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 08:08:01 -0700, Viswam wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I would like to take your help in exploring all the
>>>> options >> to bring back the performance at least to
>> old >> state for a >> couple of stored procedures involved
>> in >> batch processing >> hamper the performance.
>>>>>> As the Application team is not allowing any downtime
>> to >>>> bounce the server, need as much as possible
>> session >> based >> settings. I have take this as a
>> challenge as the >> team is >> thinking (confirming?) ASE
>> 15 is not a better >> product and >> comparing the
>> performance gain after >> upgrading to Oracle >> 11g.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please help me in resolving this, below cited is the
>>>> typical >> Query in the stored procedure.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Note: This stored procedures response time in 12.5.3
>> is >> 4 >> Hours, where as ASE 15 is taking around 9
>> Hours... >>>>
>>>>>> Rowcount:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ABC- 150
>>>>>>
>>>>>> XYZ - 10
>>>>>>
>>>>>> TBLC - 100
>>>>>>
>>>>>> BFS - 100000
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Select distinct BFS.SETID,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> BFS.CUST_ID,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> TBLC.CUST_ID + TBLC.CA_LVL_1_ID,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> XYZ.bill_level_1,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> XYZ.bill_level_2,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> XYZ.bill_level_3,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> XYZ.bill_level_4,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> TRG.CA_CONTRACT_FRM_DT,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> TRG.CA_CONTRACT_TO_DT,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> XYZ.health_cov_class,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> BFS.CA_HEALTH_COVG_CLS,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> BFS.CA_FEE_TYPE_ID,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> BFS.CA_BASIS,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> BFS.CA_UNIT_OF_MEASURE,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> BFS.CA_RATE_AMOUNT,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> TBLC.CA_SORT_ID,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> XYZ.pdbl_id, 1
>>>>>>
>>>>>> from TRG, XYZ , TBLC, BFS
>>>>>>
>>>>>> where BFS.CUST_ID = @cust_id
>>>>>>
>>>>>> and TBLC.CUST_ID = @cust_id
>>>>>>
>>>>>> and XYZ.ps_customer_number = @cust_id
>>>>>>
>>>>>> and TBLC.SETID = BFS.SETID
>>>>>>
>>>>>> and TBLC.CUST_ID = BFS.CUST_ID
>>>>>>
>>>>>> and TBLC.CA_ADMIN_CNTRV = BFS.CA_ADMIN_CNTRV
>>>>>>
>>>>>> and TRG.CA_CONTRACT_FRM_DT <=
> TBLC.CA_CONTRACT_FRM_DT
>>>>>> and TRG.CA_CONTRACT_TO_DT >= TBLC.CA_CONTRACT_TO_DT
>>>>>>
>>>>>> and TRG.CA_CONTRACT_FRM_DT <=
> BFS.CA_CONTRACT_FRM_DT
>>>>>> and TRG.CA_CONTRACT_TO_DT >= BFS.CA_CONTRACT_TO_DT
>>>>>>
>>>>>> and XYZ.basis = BFS.CA_BASIS
>>>>>>
>>>>>> and XYZ.ps_customer_number = TRG.CUST_ID
>>>>>>
>>>>>> and XYZ.bill_level_1 = TBLC.CA_LVL_1_ID
>>>>>>
>>>>>> and TBLC.CA_LVL_2_ID = ' '
>>>>>>
>>>>>> and TBLC.CA_LVL_3_ID = ' '
>>>>>>
>>>>>> and TBLC.CA_LVL_4_ID = ' '
>>>>>>
>>>>>> and ( ( substring(XYZ.pdbl_id,1,1) in ("A", "C")
>>>>>>
>>>>>> /* SSERV00007698 - changes start here */
>>>>>>
>>>>>> and BFS.CA_FEE_TYPE_ID in ("AENR", "ALMT")
>>>>>>
>>>>>> /* SSERV00007698 - changes Ends here */
>>>>>>
>>>>>> and XYZ.health_cov_class = BFS.CA_HEALTH_COVG_CLS)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> or ( substring(XYZ.pdbl_id,1,1) = "F"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> and BFS.CA_FEE_TYPE_ID in ("DNTL","DRUG","VISN"
>> ,"HOT") >>>>
>>>>>> and XYZ.health_cov_class in ("DN", "RX", "VS", "HT")
>>>>>>
>>>>>> and XYZ.health_cov_class = BFS.CA_HEALTH_COVG_CLS)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> or ( exists (select 1 from
>> fin_shared..PS_BFS_GEN_TBLC >> GEN >>
>>>>>> where GEN.CUST_ID = TRG.CUST_ID
>>>>>>
>>>>>> and GEN.CA_CONTRACT_FRM_DT <= TRG.CA_MON_BEGN_DT
>>>>>>
>>>>>> and GEN.CA_CONTRACT_TO_DT > TRG.CA_MON_BEGN_DT
>>>>>>
>>>>>> and XYZ.health_cov_class = "SL"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> and substring(XYZ.pdbl_id,1,1) = "F"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> and BFS.CA_HEALTH_COVG_CLS = "MD"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> and ( ( GEN.CA_STOP_LOSS_INDIC IN ('B', 'S')
>>>>>>
>>>>>> and BFS.CA_FEE_TYPE_ID = "SSL")
>>>>>>
>>>>>> or ( GEN.CA_STOP_LOSS_INDIC IN ('B', 'A')
>>>>>>
>>>>>> and BFS.CA_FEE_TYPE_ID = "ASL")))))
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have the following options but could not implement
>> as >> per >> policy:
>>>>>> �         Trace Flag: 757 and abstract plans
> loading
>>>>>> can�t be implemented.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> �         Compatibility mode on is not helping
> much.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks a Ton in advance...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Viswa
0
Mark
9/16/2010 10:14:53 PM
Reply:

Similar Artilces:

Migration from ASE-64 bits 12.5.0.2 to ASE 64 bits 12.5.3 for AIX 5.3
Here there someone to indicate me the road tasks in order to migrate an ASE 12.5.0.2 to ASE 12.5.3 on unix 5.3 ? (64 bits) Thank you kamel wrote: > Here there someone to indicate me the road tasks in order to > migrate an ASE 12.5.0.2 to ASE 12.5.3 on unix 5.3 ? (64 > bits) > > Thank you Apply 12.5.2 IR then 12.5.3 esd 5. -- Jason L. Froebe http://jfroebe.livejournal.com http://www.propsmart.com Team Sybase On Tue, 31 Jan 2006 07:18:22 -0800, kamel wrote: > Here there someone to indicate me the road tasks in order to migrate an > ASE 12.5.0.2 ...

Dump/Load (from ASE 12.5.4 to ASE 15.x) - VS.
Hi All, We are in the process of planning the upgrade of our ASE 12.5.4 dataservers to ASE 15.x. What is the most recommended way to upgrade ASE dataservers from ASE 12.5.4 to ASE 15.x? Potential options: 1) Install new instances of ASE 15.x and load database dumps from our ASE 12.5.4 dataservers to the newly installed ASE 15.x dataservers. - OR - 2) Use the ASE upgrade utility (sqlupgrade) to upgrade our existing ASE 12.5.4 dataservers to ASE 15.x. What are the Pros vs. Cons for loading a 12.5.4 database into a 15.x ASE dataserver versus performing an ASE dataserv...

Migration : ASE V12 (HP UX 11) to ASE V 12.5.3 (AIX 5.3)
Hi, I have to migrate a DB ASE 12.0.0.8 from HP (HP UX 11) to ASE 12.5.3 (IBM AIX 5.3) here are the characteristics: HP UX ------ The default Unix charset on the platform is Roman8. The ASE/db Charset is UTF8 AIX (5.3) --- The default Unix charset on the platform is Iso The ASE/db Charset will be UTF8 Someone told me Cross-platform DUMP/RELOAD is not possible. note that I didn't try it yet, but i will. Does anyone know about that ? If this is not possible i'll have to use 'bcp' IN/OUT i guess ? but i dont know exactly what syntax i should use w...

ASE 12.5.3 to 15, Solaris -- performance of in-place
Hi: I've been reading through the upgrade docs and I was wondering: are there performance improvements to be seen in the in-place upgrade process via parallelism? One of our 12.5.3 servers is currently an 8 CPU Sun server (7 engines). Would upgrading the data in-place via the 31-engine Sun CoolThreads (or whatever) T2000 box improve the time to load? Right now we have a lot of databases totalling about 4TB, and dump and load is just too tedious. Could you also email me your response at mrogish at tigr dot org? Thanks, -- Matt ...

Migration : ASE V12 (HP UX 11) to ASE V 12.5.3 (AIX 5.3)
Hi, I have to migrate a DB ASE 12.0.0.8 from HP (HP UX 11) to ASE 12.5.3 (IBM AIX 5.3) here are the characteristics: HP UX ------ The default Unix charset on the platform is Roman8. The ASE/db Charset is UTF8 AIX (5.3) --- The default Unix charset on the platform is Iso The ASE/db Charset will be UTF8 Someone told me Cross-platform DUMP/RELOAD is not possible. note that I didn't try it yet, but i will. Does anyone know about that ? If this is not possible i'll have to use 'bcp' IN/OUT i guess ? but i dont know exactly what syntax i should use w...

Performance drop when going from 15.0 to 12.5 client libs on ASE 12.5
Hi, I wonder if anyone could help me understand why I'm experiencing a performance drop in my application based on the version of the client libraries used. My app is built against sybase 15.0 libraries. The current installation is with ASE 12.5. When trying to use v12.5 client libraries, performance is significantly (9 times) worse than when using v15.0 client libraries. I realise that the improvement may be due to re-engineering between these two versions but the difference is too big. Can you help to explain this difference? Thanks, Adam Hello, I think you m...

ASE 12.5 to ASE 12.5.3
One of our client is having 3 no license for ASE 12.5 on Win2K (running 3 production servers) and not in the support/AMC with Sybase.. is client eligible to use ASE 12.5.3 ? Thanks KRV ...

ASE 12.5 vs ASE 11.5 performance issues
Hi All, Again my question is about performance of ASE 12.5 against 11.5.01 We have a huge production client-server application running on W2K server with ASE 11.5.0.1 database (more than 400 tables, 2000 stored procedures). The database was placed on raw disk partitions (no RAID) and split between different physical drives as follows: data, log, tempdb and master database are located on different drives. We have two PIII, 1GHz, 1 GB of memory and give 800MB for ASE. We create separate tempdb cache and bind tempdb to it. Database was bind to default data cache. Then we want to switc...

Performance Degradation after ASE 12.0 upgrade to ASE 12.5
Hello, There was a issue posted on 08/06/2002 by 'Bob' related to performance degradation after upgrade of ASE 11.9.2 to ASE 12.5. I would like to know whether anyone has found any solution/workaround to resolve those issues without making any changes in the application code. We are also facing the same problems here after upgrade of ASE 12.0 to ASE 12.5. The program which takes 10 mins. on ASE 12.0 is taking more than 3 hrs to finish on ASE 12.5 despite of using the same indexes and the program which takes 3 hrs on ASE 12.0 is taking more than 24 hours on ASE 12.5. ...

Performance issues after upgrate ASE 11.5 to ASE 12.5
Hi How can we improve performance? We're moving a database that was operating fairly well on a HP-UX 10.20 with Adaptive Server Enterprise v. 11.5 (32 bits) to a HP-UX 11.0 with Adaptive Server Enterprise v. 12.5 (32 bits) Our problem is the slower performance of the database on the new, more powerful and faster machine with newer software (in both operative system and sybase version) We've noted that it starts really fast but slows down gradually. We�ve tried many ways to improve the performance: -Increase the max memory. -Increase the number of engines at startup...

Vulnerability of ASE 12.5.2 vs ASE 12.5.3 ESD#3
Recently, Application Security, Inc. has run a vulnerability test on our ASE12.5.2. The program gave a 'high risk' on the ASE12.5.2 and suggested we install the latest Sybase patch 12.5.3 ESD#3. I have some question on the recommendation. 1. The latest patch is definitely not 12.5.3 ESD#3. Why did the program recommend 12.5.3 ESD#3? Isn't 12.5.4 better than 12.5.3? 2. Is it practical to keep up with the latest releases or patches? Now if we upgrade to 12.5.4 and then rerun the vulnerability test, will the program suggest that newer version is better with respect to s...

Migration from ASE 12.5.3 (Win 32bit) to ASE 15.0.2 (Unix 64 bit) question
Hi, I would like to migrate an ASE 12.5.3 on a Microsoft 32-bit server to an ASE 15.0.2 on Linux (or Solaris) 64-bit server. What steps must I follow? Is it a good idea to use a Replication Server 15 as intermediate task (consultant advice)? Thanks, Lorenzo My current ASE has a total size of 350Gb , 2400 connections, 2.6 Gb of memory... With ASE 12.5.3 you're suppose to be able to perform cross platform dump-n-loads (XPDL), where 'cross platform' basically means different OS's and/or different endian hardware. This (obviously?) assumes you'll be using ...

Performance issues after upgrate ASE 11.5 to ASE 12.5 #2
Hi How can we improve performance? We're moving a database that was operating fairly well on a Sun 3000 with=20 Adaptive Server Enterprise v. 11.5 (32 bits) to a Sun 10000 with Adaptive=20 Server Enterprise v. 12.5 (64 bits) and Solaris v. 8 Our problem is the slower performance of the database on the new, more=20 powerful and faster machine with newer software (in both operative system=20 and sybase version) A particular query with insert used to work for about 2 hours in a Sun 3000= =20 with Adaptive Server Enterprise v. 11.5 (32 bits).=20 In a Sun 10000 with Adaptive ...

Logins + passwords when migrating from ASE 12.5.4/Linux x86 32bit to ASE 15.0.3/Solaris SPARC 64bit
Hi, I'd like to migrate one of our databases from ASE 12.5.4 to ASE 15. Source server is running on Linux x86 32bit, target server is Solaris SPARC 64bit. Cross-plattform dump and load works fine. The problem arises with logins/passwords. I've copied the contents of syslogins from the old server to the new one, but I can't log in using one of the manually migrated logins. Checking syslogins, I noticed that the password hashes on ASE 15 look different. Old hashes are just 60 characters long, the new ones 84 characters. According to Michael Peppler's ASE on Linux FAQ...

Web resources about - Performance de-grade after migrating to ASE 15 from 12.5.3... - sybase.ase.performance+tuning

Performance - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
A performance , in performing arts , generally comprises an event in which a performer or group of performers behave in a particular way for ...

The Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 Performance Preview: Meet Kryo
... first press demonstration of the SoC , showcasing early demonstrations in action and going into more detail than ever before on their performance ...

Best of Android 2015: Performance
... phone to buy and we’re taking the guesswork out of that question. For this installment in Best of Android 2015, we’re taking a look at performance: ...

GM Performance Build Center gets $44-million investment
Filed under: Earnings/Financials , Plants/Manufacturing , GM General Motors is investing $44 million to increase capacity at its Performance ...

Climate Change Performance Index Good News For EU, Bad News For Australia And Japan
The latest Climate Change Performance Index has been released, and while the European Union can stand relatively tall, Australia, Japan, and ...

Compal enjoys notebook shipment growth in November; expects flat performance in December
Compal Electronics shipped 3.3 million notebooks in November, up from three million units in October, and it expects its December shipments to ...

Rossignol and PIQ team up to track your skiing performance
PIQ has teamed up with Rossignol to give you all the skiing metrics you probably never thought you needed. The 13-axis ski sensor, which is identical ...

Ouch! Demi Lovato Takes a Tumble During iHeartRadio Jingle Ball Performance
Ouch! Demi Lovato Takes a Tumble During iHeartRadio Jingle Ball Performance

App Performance Is Key to Business Performance: Riverbed Survey
Application performance continues to be important, but the rapidly changing nature of business and technology poses new challenges.

New Fallout 4 1.2 patch improves performance on all platforms — but at a cost
Fallout 4's latest patch will improve performance on all platforms, but it lowers graphics fidelity to do so. That's great for the Xbox One and ...

Resources last updated: 12/14/2015 10:56:26 AM