I'm using SQL Server 2012. Recently I'm have performance issue on all my stored procedures, the code inside the procedures work very fast though.
I found something about parameter sniffing so I used defining local variables technique as workaround for all my procedures.
I asked myself, why this is happening to me on all my procedures. My only guess is, that is because all my procedures are using a single OPTIONAL parameter.
This is the header of all my procedures
CREATE PROC [dbo].[MySampleProc] (#Key Int = NULL)
AS
....
Am I right? or you have any other idea?
Perhaps it's not parameter sniffing but out-of-date statistics. With a local variable (or the OPTIMIZE FOR UNKNOWN query hint), the row count estimate is based on average density. However, the actual stats histogram values are used when parameters are specified so the row count estimates will be off when stats are stale.
Try updating stats with FULLSCAN.
Related
I have a stored procedure (SP) in which a table-valued parameter (TVP) is being passed in. The same code in the SP executes a lot slowly than it does outside the SP.
I took a look at the execution plans and they are very different.
At first this seemed like a sign of parameter sniffing, however this is for a TVP! Which works a bit differently (I am not too certain - apparently there is no sniffing for TVP's?).
In any case, if I create a new local TVP and insert the rows into it, then I get a good execution plan!
CREATE PROCEDURE [dbo].[TVPSniffTest] (
#GuidList dbo.Guid_LIST readonly
)
AS
BEGIN
DECLARE #GuidList2 dbo.Guid_LIST
INSERT INTO #GuidList2
SELECT * FROM #GuidList
--query code here using #GuidList2, produces a good plan!
END
What is going on?
Edit I've tried a number of query optimizer hints, they do not work. Including the one in the suggested duplicate question. It's almost like the bad plan (slow one), is the one that is correct in terms of the estimated number of rows. The fast plan has an incorrect estimation of the number of rows.
TVPs don't have distribution statistics, but they do have cardinality information.
Parameter sniffing applies to table-valued parameters: the optimizer might reuse a plan compiled for a low-cardinality TVP in a following invocation of the SP on a TVP with many rows.
Sources:
Erland Sommarskog's Arrays and Lists in SQL Server: The Long Version
(section 13.1 Performance in SQL Server)
BrentOzar's Table Valued Parameters: Unexpected Parameter Sniffing (see "Second Thing: They don’t get a fixed estimate like Table Variables" and "Third Thing: Non-join cardinality estimates behave like local variables (fixed estimates)")
I have a stored procedure that works fine previously. It took 4 to 5 secs to get the results.
I didn't used this stored procedure for the past two months. When I call the same procedure now it takes more than 5 minutes to produce the result.
(There is no records populated to my source tables in the past two months)
I converted the stored procedure and executed as TSQL block it is back to normal. But when I convert back to stored procedure again it is taking more than 5 minutes.
I am wondering why it is behaving like this. I used 6 table variables. I just populating those table variables to get the desired results by joining all those.
I already tried the below options
With Recompile at the stored procedure level
DBCC FREEPROCCACHE
DBCC DROPCLEANBUFFERS
sp_updatestats
but there is no improvement. When I execute it as TSQL it works fine.
Please suggest me any ideas to optimize the stored procedure.
In your queries, add OPTION(OPTIMIZE FOR UNKNOWN) (as the last clause) to prevent parameter sniffing. For syntax and explanation, see the documentation on Query Hints.
What SQL Server does the first time it runs a Stored Procedure is optimize the execution plan(s) for the parameters that were passed to it. This is done in a process that is called Parameter Sniffing.
In general, execution plans are cached by SQL Server so that SQL Server doesn't have to recompile each time for the same query. The next time the procedure is run, SQL Server will re-use the execution plan(s) for the queries in it... However, the execution plan(s) might be totally inefficient if you call it (them) with different parameters.
The option I gave you will tell to the SQL compiler that the execution plan should not be optimized for specific parameters, but rather for any parameter that is passed to the Stored Procedure.
To quote the documentation:
OPTIMIZE FOR UNKNOWN
Instructs the query optimizer to use statistical data instead of the initial values for all local variables when the query is compiled and optimized, including parameters created with forced parameterization.
In some cases Stored Procedures can benefit from Parameter Sniffing, in some cases they don't. For the Stored Procedures that don't benefit from Paramater Sniffing, you can add the option to each query that uses any of the parameters of the Stored Procedure.
You may have bad execution plan associated with that proc.
Try this one
DBCC FREESYSTEMCACHE ('ALL') WITH MARK_IN_USE_FOR_REMOVAL;
You may also find this interesting to read
http://www.sqlpointers.com/2006/11/parameter-sniffing-stored-procedures.html
I have a simple SELECT statement with a couple columns referenced in the WHERE clause. Normally I do these simple ones in the VB code (setup a Command object, set Command Type to text, set Command Text to the Select statement). However I'm seeing timeout problems. We've optimized just about everything we can with our tables, etc.
I'm wondering if there'd be a big performance hit just because I'm doing the query this way, versus creating a simple stored procedure with a couple params. I'm thinking maybe the inline code forces SQL to do extra work compiling, creating query plan, etc. which wouldn't occur if I used a stored procedure.
An example of the actual SQL being run:
SELECT TOP 1 * FROM MyTable WHERE Field1 = #Field1 ORDER BY ID DESC
A well formed "inline" or "ad-hoc" SQL query - if properly used with parameters - is just as good as a stored procedure.
But this is absolutely crucial: you must use properly parametrized queries! If you don't - if you concatenate together your SQL for each request - then you don't benefit from these points...
Just like with a stored procedure, upon first executing, a query execution plan must be found - and then that execution plan is cached in the plan cache - just like with a stored procedure.
That query plan is reused over and over again, if you call your inline parametrized SQL statement multiple times - and the "inline" SQL query plan is subject to the same cache eviction policies as the execution plan of a stored procedure.
Just from that point of view - if you really use properly parametrized queries - there's no performance benefit for a stored procedure.
Stored procedures have other benefits (like being a "security boundary" etc.), but just raw performance isn't one of their major plus points.
It is true that the db has to do the extra work you mention, but that should not result in a big performance hit (unless you are running the query very, very frequently..)
Use sql profiler to see what is actually getting sent to the server. Use activity monitor to see if there are other queries blocking yours.
Your query couldn't be simpler. Is Field1 indexed? As others have said, there is no performance hit associated with "ad-hoc" queries.
For where to put your queries, this is one of the oldest debates in tech. I would argue that your requests "belong" to your application. They will be versionned with your app, tested with your app and should disappear when your app disappears. Putting them anywhere other than in your app is walking into a world of pain. But for goodness sake, use .sql files, compiled as embedded resources.
Select statement which is part of form clause of any
another statement is called as inline query.
Cannot take parameters.
Not a database object
Procedure:
Can take paramters
Database object
can be used globally if same action needs to be performed.
What are the differences between stored procedures and functions.
Whenever there are more input, output parameters i go for stored procedure. If it is only one i will go for functions.
Besides that, is there any performance issue if i use more stored procedures? I am worried as i have close to 50 stored procedures in my project.
How they differ conceptually.
Thanks in advance!
EDITED:-
When i executed a calculation in stored procedure and in functions, i have found that in stored procedures it is taking 0.15 sec, while in function it takes 0.45sec.
Surprisingly functions are taking more time than stored procedures. May be functions are worth for its reusability.
Inline functions executes quicker than strored procedures. I think, this is because multi-select functions can't use statastics, which slows them down, but inline table-value functions can use statistics.
Difference between stored procedure and functions in SQL Server ...
http://www.dotnetspider.com/resources/18920-Difference-between-Stored-Procedure-Functions.aspx
Difference between Stored procedures and User Defined functions[UDF]
http://www.go4expert.com/forums/showthread.php?t=329
Stored procedures vs. functions
http://searchsqlserver.techtarget.com/tip/Stored-procedures-vs-functions
What are the differences between stored procedure and functions in ...
http://www.allinterview.com/showanswers/28431.html
Difference between Stored procedure and functions
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Topic416974-8-1.aspx
To decide between using one of the two, keep in mind the fundamental difference between them: stored procedures are designed to return its output to the application. A UDF returns table variables, while a SPROC can't return a table variable although it can create a table. Another significant difference between them is that UDFs can't change the server environment or your operating system environment, while a SPROC can. Operationally, when T-SQL encounters an error the function stops, while T-SQL will ignore an error in a SPROC and proceed to the next statement in your code (provided you've included error handling support). You'll also find that although a SPROC can be used in an XML FOR clause, a UDF cannot be.
If you have an operation such as a query with a FROM clause that requires a rowset be drawn from a table or set of tables, then a function will be your appropriate choice. However, when you want to use that same rowset in your application the better choice would be a stored procedure.
There's quite a bit of debate about the performance benefits of UDFs vs. SPROCs. You might be tempted to believe that stored procedures add more overhead to your server than a UDF. Depending upon how your write your code and the type of data you're processing, this might not be the case. It's always a good idea to text your data in important or time-consuming operations by trying both types of methods on them.
A while ago I had a query that I ran quite a lot for one of my users. It was still being evolved and tweaked but eventually it stablised and ran quite quickly, so we created a stored procedure from it.
So far, so normal.
The stored procedure, though, was dog slow. No material difference between the query and the proc, but the speed change was massive.
[Background, we're running SQL Server 2005.]
A friendly local DBA (who no longer works here) took one look at the stored procedure and said "parameter spoofing!" (Edit: although it seems that it is possibly also known as 'parameter sniffing', which might explain the paucity of Google hits when I tried to search it out.)
We abstracted some of the stored procedure to a second one, wrapped the call to this new inner proc into the pre-existing outer one, called the outer one and, hey presto, it was as quick as the original query.
So, what gives? Can someone explain parameter spoofing?
Bonus credit for
highlighting how to avoid it
suggesting how to recognise possible cause
discuss alternative strategies, e.g. stats, indices, keys, for mitigating the situation
FYI - you need to be aware of something else when you're working with SQL 2005 and stored procs with parameters.
SQL Server will compile the stored proc's execution plan with the first parameter that's used. So if you run this:
usp_QueryMyDataByState 'Rhode Island'
The execution plan will work best with a small state's data. But if someone turns around and runs:
usp_QueryMyDataByState 'Texas'
The execution plan designed for Rhode-Island-sized data may not be as efficient with Texas-sized data. This can produce surprising results when the server is restarted, because the newly generated execution plan will be targeted at whatever parameter is used first - not necessarily the best one. The plan won't be recompiled until there's a big reason to do it, like if statistics are rebuilt.
This is where query plans come in, and SQL Server 2008 offers a lot of new features that help DBAs pin a particular query plan in place long-term no matter what parameters get called first.
My concern is that when you rebuilt your stored proc, you forced the execution plan to recompile. You called it with your favorite parameter, and then of course it was fast - but the problem may not have been the stored proc. It might have been that the stored proc was recompiled at some point with an unusual set of parameters and thus, an inefficient query plan. You might not have fixed anything, and you might face the same problem the next time the server restarts or the query plan gets recompiled.
Yes, I think you mean parameter sniffing, which is a technique the SQL Server optimizer uses to try to figure out parameter values/ranges so it can choose the best execution plan for your query. In some instances SQL Server does a poor job at parameter sniffing & doesn't pick the best execution plan for the query.
I believe this blog article http://blogs.msdn.com/queryoptteam/archive/2006/03/31/565991.aspx has a good explanation.
It seems that the DBA in your example chose option #4 to move the query to another sproc to a separate procedural context.
You could have also used the with recompile on the original sproc or used the optimize for option on the parameter.
A simple way to speed that up is to reassign the input parameters to local parameters in the very beginning of the sproc, e.g.
CREATE PROCEDURE uspParameterSniffingAvoidance
#SniffedFormalParameter int
AS
BEGIN
DECLARE #SniffAvoidingLocalParameter int
SET #SniffAvoidingLocalParameter = #SniffedFormalParameter
--Work w/ #SniffAvoidingLocalParameter in sproc body
-- ...
In my experience, the best solution for parameter sniffing is 'Dynamic SQL'. Two important things to note is that 1. you should use parameters in your dynamic sql query 2. you should use sp_executesql (and not sp_execute), which saves the execution plan for each parameter values
Parameter sniffing is a technique SQL Server uses to optimize the query execution plan for a stored procedure. When you first call the stored procedure, SQL Server looks at the given parameter values of your call and decides which indices to use based on the parameter values.
So when the first call contains not very typical parameters, SQL Server might select and store a sub-optimal execution plan in regard to the following calls of the stored procedure.
You can work around this by either
using WITH RECOMPILE
copying the parameter values to local variables inside the stored procedure and using the locals in your queries.
I even heard that it's better to not use stored procedures at all but to send your queries directly to the server.
I recently came across the same problem where I have no real solution yet.
For some queries the copy to local vars helps getting back to the right execution plan, for some queries performance degrades with local vars.
I still have to do more research on how SQL Server caches and reuses (sub-optimal) execution plans.
I had similar problem. My stored procedure's execution plan took 30-40 seconds. I tried using the SP Statements in query window and it took few ms to execute the same.
Then I worked out declaring local variables within stored procedure and transferring the values of parameters to local variables. This made the SP execution very fast and now the same SP executes within few milliseconds instead of 30-40 seconds.
Very simple and sort, Query optimizer use old query plan for frequently running queries. but actually the size of data is also increasing so at that time new optimized plan is require and still query optimizer using old plan of query. This is called Parameter Sniffing.
I have also created detailed post on this. Please visit this url:
http://www.dbrnd.com/2015/05/sql-server-parameter-sniffing/
Changing your store procedure to execute as a batch should increase the speed.
Batch file select i.e.:
exec ('select * from order where order id ='''+ #ordersID')
Instead of the normal stored procedure select:
select * from order where order id = #ordersID
Just pass in the parameter as nvarchar and you should get quicker results.