标签：current 期望 最好 tis first seq reported range 不同的
对于数据库整体的性能问题，AWR的报告是一个非常有用的诊断工具。
一般来说，当检测到性能问题时，我们会收集覆盖了发生问题的时间段的AWR报告-但是最好只收集覆盖1个小时时间段的AWR报告-如果时间过长，那么AWR报告就不能很好的反映出问题所在。
还应该收集一份没有性能问题的时间段的AWR报告，作为一个参照物来对比有问题的时间段的AWR报告。这两个AWR报告的时间段应该是一致的，比如都是半个小时的，或者都是一个小时的。
关于如何收集AWR报告，请参照如下文档：
在处理性能问题时，我们最关注的是数据库正在等待什么。
当进程因为某些原因不能进行操作时，它需要等待。花费时间最多的等待事件是我们最需要关注的，因为降低它，我们能够获得最大的好处。
AWR报告中的"Top 5 Timed Events"部分就提供了这样的信息，可以让我们只关注主要的问题。
Top 5 Timed Events Avg %Total
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ wait Call
Event Waits Time (s) (ms) Time Wait Class
------------------------------ ------------ ----------- ------ ------ ----------
db file scattered read 10,152,564 81,327 8 29.6 User I/O
db file sequential read 10,327,231 75,878 7 27.6 User I/O
CPU time 56,207 20.5
read by other session 4,397,330 33,455 8 12.2 User I/O
PX Deq Credit: send blkd 31,398 26,576 846 9.7 Other
-------------------------------------------------------------
Tablespace IO Stats DB/Inst: VMWREP/VMWREP Snaps: 1-15
-> ordered by IOs (Reads + Writes) desc
Tablespace
------------------------------
Av Av Av Av Buffer Av Buf
Reads Reads/s Rd(ms) Blks/Rd Writes Writes/s Waits Wt(ms)
-------------- ------- ------ ------- ------------ -------- ---------- ------
TS_TX_DATA
14,246,367 283 7.6 4.6 145,263,880 2,883 3,844,161 8.3
USER
204,834 4 10.7 1.0 17,849,021 354 15,249 9.8
UNDOTS1
19,725 0 3.0 1.0 10,064,086 200 1,964 4.9
AE_TS
4,287,567 85 5.4 6.7 932 0 465,793 3.7
TEMP
2,022,883 40 0.0 5.8 878,049 17 0 0.0
UNDOTS3
1,310,493 26 4.6 1.0 941,675 19 43 0.0
TS_TX_IDX
1,884,478 37 7.3 1.0 23,695 0 73,703 8.3
>SYSAUX
346,094 7 5.6 3.9 112,744 2 0 0.0
SYSTEM
101,771 2 7.9 3.5 25,098 0 653 2.7
SQL ordered by Gets
-> Resources reported for PL/SQL code includes the resources used by all SQL
statements called by the code.
-> Total Buffer Gets: 4,745,943,815
-> Captured SQL account for 122.2% of Total
Gets CPU Elapsed
Buffer Gets Executions per Exec %Total Time (s) Time (s) SQL Id
-------------- ------------ ------------ ------ -------- --------- -------------
1,228,753,877 168 7,314,011.2 25.9 8022.46 8404.73 5t1y1nvmwp2
SELECT ADDRESSID",CURRENT$."ADDRESSTYPEID",CURRENT$URRENT$."ADDRESS3",
CURRENT$."CITY",CURRENT$."ZIP",CURRENT$."STATE",CURRENT$."PHONECOUNTRYCODE",
CURRENT$."PHONENUMBER",CURRENT$."PHONEEXTENSION",CURRENT$."FAXCOU
1,039,875,759 62,959,363 16.5 21.9 5320.27 5618.96 grr4mg7ms81
Module: DBMS_SCHEDULER
INSERT INTO "ADDRESS_RDONLY" ("ADDRESSID","ADDRESSTYPEID","CUSTOMERID","
ADDRESS1","ADDRESS2","ADDRESS3","CITY","ZIP","STATE","PHONECOUNTRYCODE","PHONENU
854,035,223 168 5,083,543.0 18.0 5713.50 7458.95 4at7cbx8hnz
SELECT "CUSTOMERID",CURRENT$."ISACTIVE",CURRENT$."FIRSTNAME",CURRENT$."LASTNAME",CU<
RRENT$."ORGANIZATION",CURRENT$."DATEREGISTERED",CURRENT$."CUSTOMERSTATUSID",CURR
ENT$."LASTMODIFIEDDATE",CURRENT$."SOURCE",CURRENT$."EMPLOYEEDEPT",CURRENT$.
Load Profile
~~~~~~~~~~~~ Per Second Per Transaction
--------------- ---------------
Redo size: 4,585,414.80 3,165,883.14
Logical reads: 94,185.63 65,028.07
Block changes: 40,028.57 27,636.71
Physical reads: 2,206.12 1,523.16
Physical writes: 3,939.97 2,720.25
User calls: 50.08 34.58
Parses: 26.96 18.61
Hard parses: 1.49 1.03
Sorts: 18.36 12.68
Logons: 0.13 0.09
Executes: 4,925.89 3,400.96
Transactions: 1.45
% Blocks changed per Read: 42.50 Recursive Call %: 99.19
Rollback per transaction %: 59.69 Rows per Sort: 1922.64
Instance Efficiency Percentages (Target 100%)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Buffer Nowait %: 99.91 Redo NoWait %: 100.00
Buffer Hit %: 98.14 In-memory Sort %: 99.98
Library Hit %: 99.91 Soft Parse %: 94.48
Execute to Parse %: 99.45 Latch Hit %: 99.97
Parse CPU to Parse Elapsd %: 71.23 % Non-Parse CPU: 99.00
Latch Sleep Breakdown * ordered by misses desc Latch Name ---------------------------------------- Get Requests Misses Sleeps Spin Gets Sleep1 Sleep2 Sleep3 -------------- ----------- ----------- ---------- -------- -------- -------- cache buffers chains 2,881,936,948 3,070,271 41,336 3,031,456 0 0 0 row cache objects 941,375,571 1,215,395 852 1,214,606 0 0 0 object queue header operation 763,607,977 949,376 30,484 919,782 0 0 0 cache buffers lru chain 376,874,990 705,162 3,192 702,090 0 0 0
SQL ordered by CPU Time
-> Resources reported for PL/SQL code includes the resources used by all SQL
statements called by the code.
-> % Total is the CPU Time divided into the Total CPU Time times 100
-> Total CPU Time (s): 56,207
-> Captured SQL account for 114.6% of Total
CPU Elapsed CPU per % Total
Time (s) Time (s) Executions Exec (s) % Total DB Time SQL Id
---------- ---------- ------------ ----------- ------- ------- -------------
20,349 24,884 168 121.12 36.2 9.1 7bbhgqykv3cm9
Module: DBMS_SCHEDULER
DECLARE job BINARY_INTEGER := :job; next_date TIMESTAMP WITH TIME ZONE := :myda
te; broken BOOLEAN := FALSE; job_name VARCHAR2(30) := :job_name; job_subname
VARCHAR2(30) := :job_subname; job_owner VARCHAR2(30) := :job_owner; job_start
TIMESTAMP WITH TIME ZONE := :job_start; job_scheduled_start TIMESTAMP WITH TIME
关于其他性能问题，请参照文档:
当分析性能问题时，除了AWR报告，我们还可以同时参照ADDM报告，对于潜在的性能问题，它同时提供了具体的解决方案建议。下面是从如下文档拿到的一个ADDM报告示例：
Example Output:
ADDM报告相比AWR报告来说，它提供了可读性更好的建议；当然应该同时参照ADDM报告和AWR报告来得到更准确地诊断。
标签：current 期望 最好 tis first seq reported range 不同的
原文地址：https://www.cnblogs.com/muzisanshi/p/11897865.html
