Re: Curious performance experiment
From: JXStern (JXSternChangeX2R_at_gte.net)
Date: 11/04/04
- Next message: Hubert Mayr: "sqlserver 2000 odbc error"
- Previous message: JXStern: "Re: Curious performance experiment"
- In reply to: David Gugick: "Re: Curious performance experiment"
- Next in thread: Uri Dimant: "Re: Curious performance experiment"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 00:29:32 -0800
On Wed, 3 Nov 2004 19:47:13 -0500, "David Gugick"
<davidg-nospam@imceda.com> wrote:
>What are these"reads"? Are you using STATISTS IO for the information?
Yes, statistics io, and I'm looking at just the logical reads.
> If
>so, how many logical vs physical?
Lots of logical, very few physical.
>You might consider using Profiler to
>see the reads, CPU, and duration.
I've been running the profiler also, but didn't use it on these cases.
> Don't be alarmed that the reads in
>Profiler do not match that of STATISTICS IO. They are reading different
>structures and the SQL Trace API will normally report reads that are not
>tracked by STATISTICS IO.
I'm just comparing runs via statistics io at this point.
Interesting if profiler shows a different pattern, I'll try to post if
I get the chance to try it.
So, nobody is quite going with my theory that the logical reads aren't
purely logical??
J.
- Next message: Hubert Mayr: "sqlserver 2000 odbc error"
- Previous message: JXStern: "Re: Curious performance experiment"
- In reply to: David Gugick: "Re: Curious performance experiment"
- Next in thread: Uri Dimant: "Re: Curious performance experiment"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|