关闭

High Waits on 'Db File Sequential Read' Due to Table Lookup Following Index Access (文档 ID 875472.1)

445人阅读 评论(0) 收藏 举报
分类:

In this Document

  Symptoms
  Cause
  Solution
  References

APPLIES TO:

Oracle Server - Enterprise Edition - Version 8.0.3.0 to 11.2.0.2 [Release 8.0.3 to 11.2]
Information in this document applies to any platform.

SYMPTOMS

A query can wait on 'db file sequential read' for a long time even if the execution plan appears to be optimal. 
This usually happens when the result set of index scan is large.

For example:

SELECT D
FROM BIG_TABLE
WHERE A = 1253
AND B in ('CA', 'CO')
AND C > 210 ;


Rows    Row Source Operation
------- ---------------------------------------------------
 215431 TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID BIG_TABLE (cr=880191 pr=430780 pw=0 time=2293667056 us) <<<
3582275  INDEX RANGE SCAN BIG_TABLE_IDX (cr=664748 pr=218595 pw=0 time=352506821 us)

Elapsed times include waiting on following events:
  Event waited on                             Times   Max. Wait  Total Waited
  ----------------------------------------   Waited  ----------  ------------
  SQL*Net message to client                   14363        0.00          0.02
  db file sequential read                    461688        1.15       2254.55 <<<
  SQL*Net message from client                 14363        0.01          9.77
  SQL*Net break/reset to client                   1        0.00          0.00
...

 

CAUSE

In most cases like this, the execution of the query waits on "TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID" much longer than on INDEX SCAN. It is because the random access to the table rows is much more expensive than index scan.

 

SOLUTION

You can try one or more of the following.

 

1. Check if there is a better index or plan. You may need to re-design index configuration.

 

2. Try table full scan. Full scan often runs faster than Index scan, though its CBO cost is higher than the cost of Index scan.

SELECT /*+ FULL(BIG_TABLE) */  D 
FROM BIG_TABLE 
WHERE A = 1253 
AND B in ('CA', 'CO') 
AND C > 210 ;

 

3. Create a concatenated index to avoid the table access if the query has only a few columns of the table in SELECT and WHERE clauses. 

For example:

CREATE INDEX <INDEX_NAME> ON BIG_TABLE (A, B, C, D);

 NOTE : This can only be applied to SELECT for the table. If the query updates the table, this will not help.

 

4. Move the table into the tablespace with a larger block size.  A larger block has more rows in it, so it may help to reduce block I/O.

    And it will also be helpful to reorganize the table so that the index may have a smaller clustering factor.

 

5. Consider increasing buffer cache so that more table blocks can be cached. It is a good idea to use keep buffer pool if the table is frequently accessed.

Note 76374.1 Multiple Buffer Pools

 

6. Consider using IOT(Index Organized Table). IOT may reduce I/O because it stores data in a B*Tree index structure.
   For example, if the column 'A' is the primiary key of BIG_TABLE, you can try to create IOT as follows.
   
   create table BIG_TABLE (A number primary key, B char(2), C number, D varchar2(10)) 
   organization index;

 

7. Consider using parallel execution if there is sufficient free resource(CPU, memory) in the server.
   This option does not reduce I/O. But, this may help to reduce execution time.

 

8. Bad disk I/O can be a reason. In this case, improve the I/O of devices where the table resides. This requires help from a system administrator.

REFERENCES

NOTE:34559.1 - WAITEVENT: "db file sequential read" Reference Note
NOTE:76374.1 - Multiple Buffer Pools
 
 

相关内容

   
 
0
0

猜你在找
【直播】机器学习&数据挖掘7周实训--韦玮
【套餐】系统集成项目管理工程师顺利通关--徐朋
【直播】3小时掌握Docker最佳实战-徐西宁
【套餐】机器学习系列套餐(算法+实战)--唐宇迪
【直播】计算机视觉原理及实战--屈教授
【套餐】微信订阅号+服务号Java版 v2.0--翟东平
【直播】机器学习之矩阵--黄博士
【套餐】微信订阅号+服务号Java版 v2.0--翟东平
【直播】机器学习之凸优化--马博士
【套餐】Javascript 设计模式实战--曾亮
查看评论
* 以上用户言论只代表其个人观点,不代表CSDN网站的观点或立场
    个人资料
    • 访问:232947次
    • 积分:2370
    • 等级:
    • 排名:第15705名
    • 原创:2篇
    • 转载:184篇
    • 译文:0篇
    • 评论:4条