Re: Strange performance setting Execution Location=3
From: Chris Webb (OnlyForPostingToNewsgroups_at_hotmail.com)
Date: 04/07/04
- Next message: Chris Webb: "RE: Passing parameters through MDX"
- Previous message: Andrej Hudoklin: "Re: Experts Can u help!"
- In reply to: David Hwang: "Re: Strange performance setting Execution Location=3"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2004 06:16:07 -0700
I agree with Denny - why are you creating and merging partitions so often? You'll have to give us a more detailed explanation of your system if we're going to offer any more advice. We'll also need to know about the queries you're running and any calculated members on the cube.
One point about aggregations: yes, they will slow down processing and merging, but you should find that one or two well-chosen (and often small) aggregations can make a big impact on query performance while only increasing process and merge times a little.
Chris
----- David Hwang wrote: -----
Thanks for the response. That Performance Guide was quite helpful for
understanding many aspects of Analysis Server. Unfortunately, I
wasn't able to use it to improve the performance of our system. We
are constantly creating new partitions (with new data) and merging
them in. Essentially doing the incremental cube updates ourselves.
So in our case, we need to worry about three times: process time,
merge time, and query time. It seems like anything I do to speed up
one of those will slow down another one of those times. Using
aggregations is great for query times, but processing and merging of
the new partitions became prohibitively slow. Any suggestions for
changes that might increase performance across the board?
OnlyForPostingToNewsgroups@hotmail.com (Chris Webb) wrote in message news:<48d9285e.0403180153.5c0f512e@posting.google.com>...
> I think the point to make here is that remoting a query doesn't
> necessarily mean improved performance - although the server might have
> a faster CPU, this isn't the only factor at work here. What was the
> server CPU doing when you first ran the query, without trying to
> remote it? Did you do your tests with a cold cache on the client and
> server?
>> In any case, it sounds like you need to explore other other avenues to
> improve query performance. Have you tried Usage-Based Optimisation to
> see if you have the aggregations needed for this query? Are there any
> calculated members in this query? Have you read the Analysis Services
> Performance Guide?
> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2000/maintain/ansvcspg.mspx
>> Regards,
>> Chris
>> davidhwang@usa.com (David Hwang) wrote in message news:<d9f37fcd.0403171253.3dc405e6@posting.google.com>...
>> In an attempt to speed up a Pivot Table view, I tried changing the
>> Execution Location (also Default Isolation Mode=1) to the server since
>> it seemed like the client cpu was pegging while updating. After
>> making this change, the client cpu usage is almost zero and the server
>> cpu shows heavy usage. However, this makes the query take almost
>> twice as long even though the server has a much faster cpu. Has
>> anyone else seen similar behavior? Is the same work really being done
>> on both sides?
>>>> David
- Next message: Chris Webb: "RE: Passing parameters through MDX"
- Previous message: Andrej Hudoklin: "Re: Experts Can u help!"
- In reply to: David Hwang: "Re: Strange performance setting Execution Location=3"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
