Carlos Sierra's Tools and Tips

Tools and Tips for Oracle Performance and SQL Tuning

Posts Tagged ‘10g

On Plan Stability

with one comment

I was recently working a case of plan stability on 10g. I looked at the SQL text and noticed it had no binds. So it was easy to rule out typical combination of predicates with binds, on columns with histograms, which is known to cause plan instability on 10g (and 9i). 11g does a better job in this area with the implementation of Adaptive Cursor Sharing (ACS), but that is a different story for some other entry.

I looked for histograms in the tables accessed by this SQL and there were no histograms at all. So combination of predicates with literals on columns with histograms could also be ruled out.

Anyways, this is 10g with no binds and no histograms. Indexes were not my suspect since customer insisted the environment was not changing. All they claimed was this one report with very inconsistent execution time over the past few days.

If you are suspecting statistics you are in the right track, but how to prove or rule out? Well, look at the plan cost, for the current and historical plans. Yes, you need to see in AWR if there are any prior plans. Sure enough, the history of 3 plans showed significant cost variances. OK, same SQL, no binds, no histograms, different cost over time, thus it seems to be the statistics. Now the question changes to “what piece of the statistics is making my plan to change”?

If this had been 11g, you could use DBMS_STATS APIs to compare statistics as explained by Maria in a recent blog entry. But this is 10g… On top of that, this customer is gathering statistics daily, so there were several “versions” of the statistics… Many candidates to review…

Anyways, I reviewed current and prior plans, observing where in the plan the cost was so different, and it was clear in a couple of operations referencing the same table. Looking at the predicates of the current plan and the predicates in the SQL text, I noticed one that looked like this “column = ‘N'”. Column statistics showed that column had only one distinct value and it was “Y”. This is when the plan was “bad” meaning poorly performing.

Now, looking at the column history it was evident that different versions of column statistics showed the number of distinct values to fluctuate between 1 and 2. When it was 2, the low and high values were “N” and “Y”. That was the root cause of the plan to keep changing.

When the CBO was evaluating predicate “column = ‘N'” and the NDV was 1, then the selectivity for this predicate was 0. When the NDV was 2, the selectivity was 0.5. Being this a large table  and having poorly selective predicates, this one simple equality predicate was causing the overall single-table selectivity to change drastically.

Customer is gathering statistics with a sample size of 15%, and keep in mind they are gathering with no histograms. So I cannot tell for sure if value “N” simply has very few rows, or maybe when they gather statistics there are no rows with value “N”, which are set sometime latter between the gathering of the statistics and the execution of this report.

What I did to prove or disprove what I was concluding, was to implement a test case using SQLTXPLAIN. Then I executed this code below. And sure enough I was able to reproduce now the “good” plan.

DECLARE
 distcnt NUMBER;
 density NUMBER;
 nullcnt NUMBER;
 avgclen NUMBER;
 srec DBMS_STATS.STATREC;
 charvals DBMS_STATS.CHARARRAY;
BEGIN
 DBMS_STATS.GET_COLUMN_STATS (
 ownname => 'TC23285',
 tabname => 'XL_PROFSVC_CLAIM_HEADER',
 colname => 'ETL_PRCS_IN_CD',
 distcnt => distcnt,
 density => density,
 nullcnt => nullcnt,
 srec => srec,
 avgclen => avgclen );

distcnt := 2;
 density := 1/distcnt;
 srec.epc := 2;
 charvals := DBMS_STATS.CHARARRAY ();
 charvals.EXTEND(2);
 charvals(1) := 'N';
 charvals(2) := 'Y';
 srec.bkvals := NULL;

DBMS_STATS.PREPARE_COLUMN_VALUES (
 srec => srec,
 charvals => charvals );

DBMS_STATS.SET_COLUMN_STATS (
 ownname => 'TC23285',
 tabname => 'XL_PROFSVC_CLAIM_HEADER',
 colname => 'ETL_PRCS_IN_CD',
 distcnt => distcnt,
 density => density,
 nullcnt => nullcnt,
 srec => srec,
 avgclen => avgclen,
 no_invalidate => FALSE,
 force => TRUE );
END;
/
Advertisements

Written by Carlos Sierra

May 24, 2012 at 8:16 am

Posted in Plan Stability, SQLTXPLAIN (SQLT)

Tagged with

Custom SQL Profile and Plan Stability on 10g

with one comment

SQLTXPLAIN includes into the sqlt/utl sub-directory a script named coe_xfr_sql_profile.sql. This script inputs a SQL_ID, then it asks to choose from a list of known Plan Hash Values (PHV), and after a few seconds it outputs another script that contains the Outline of the PHV together with the SQL Text for the given SQL_ID.

These are some of the things we can do with the script generated by coe_xfr_sql_profile.sql for your SQL_ID/PHV:

  1. If we execute the generated script with no modifications into the same system, then it creates a Custom SQL Profile with the Outline of the plan from given SQL_ID/PHV. This Plan is independent of CBO Statistics, meaning your Plan will be stable even if you gather new statistics (or delete them).
  2. If we execute this generated script into a similar system (one with same schema objects), then it creates the Custom SQL Profile from the source system into the target system. That means we basically migrated the PHV into another system. Think on this: “DEV instance exhibits a good-performing Plan. PROD only generates a poorly-performing Plan. You want to quickly migrate the good Plan from DEV into PROD”.
  3. You can only generate a good-performing Plan if you place a CBO Hint in your SQL, but you cannot modify the application. So, you execute a modified version of your SQL which includes the CBO Hint, then execute coe_xfr_sql_profile.sql for this modified SQL. When you open the generated script you remove the CBO Hint from the SQL Text section. Then this newly generated and modified script contains the original SQL without the Hint and the Outline of the Plan with the Hint. When executed either on the source system or a target system, it creates a custom SQL Profile on it. This Profile associates the original SQL with the good-performing Plan.
  4. Your original SQL contains a CBO Hint or set of hints and it produces a poorly-performing Plan. When you remove them you notice you get a good-performing Plan, so you execute  coe_xfr_sql_profile.sql for the modified SQL (the one with the hints removed). Then you open the generated script and replace on it the SQL Text with the original one (with the hints on it). This generated and modified script, when executed on the source or target system, will create a Custom SQL Profile for the original SQL with the good-performing Plan.

If after you create a Custom SQL Profile with coe_xfr_sql_profile.sql you change your mind and want to drop such Profile, you will find the drop command on the same script that was generated by coe_xfr_sql_profile.sql containing your Profile.

This coe_xfr_sql_profile.sql script uses API DBMS_SQLTUNE.IMPORT_SQL_PROFILE, which is not documented.

A word of caution:

SQL Profiles are basically a set of CBO Hints associated to a SQL Text through a “signature”. This signature is a hash function on the SQL Text. If a Hint from the Profile cannot be applied, it does not invalidate the entire Profile. In other words, the CBO will still try to apply as many Hints as possible. Imagine that one of the Hints refers to an Index, and the Index is dropped, then the Hint will get silently ignored. This may produce sub-optimal Plans.

Another consideration is the effect of a Virtual Private Database (VPD), which appends some dynamic predicates to your SQL. In this case, the Plan produced with the Profile my not be optimal.

If your database is 11g or higher, you’d rather want to use SQL Plan Management (SPM), which provides better Plan Control functionality.

Written by Carlos Sierra

April 9, 2012 at 8:13 am