分类目录归档：Oracle

执行计划中常见index访问方式

发表于 2012 年 4 月 21 日 由 惜分飞

近期有朋友对于单个表上的index各种情况比较模糊,这里对于单个表上,单个index出现的大多数情况进行了总结性测试,给出了测试结果,至于为什么出现这样的试验结果未做过多解释,给读者留下思考的空间.本篇文章仅仅是为了测试hint对index的影响,而不是说明走各种index方式的好坏.参考: INDEX FULL SCAN vs INDEX FAST FULL SCAN
创建表模拟测试

SQL> create table t_xifenfei as select object_id,object_name from dba_objects;

Table created.


SQL>  create index i_t_object_id on t_xifenfei(object_id); 

Index created.

SQL> exec dbms_stats.gather_table_stats(USER,'T_XIFENFEI',cascade=>true); 

PL/SQL procedure successfully completed.

SQL> desc t_xifenfei
 Name                                      Null?    Type
 ----------------------------------------- -------- ----------------------------
 OBJECT_ID                                          NUMBER
 OBJECT_NAME                                        VARCHAR2(128)

TABLE ACCESS FULL

SQL> SET AUTOT TRACE EXP STAT
SQL> SELECT OBJECT_ID FROM T_XIFENFEI;

49838 rows selected.


Execution Plan
----------------------------------------------------------
Plan hash value: 548923532

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id  | Operation         | Name       | Rows  | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT  |            | 49838 |   243K|    57   (2)| 00:00:01 |
|   1 |  TABLE ACCESS FULL| T_XIFENFEI | 49838 |   243K|    57   (2)| 00:00:01 |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Statistics
----------------------------------------------------------
          1  recursive calls
          0  db block gets
       3544  consistent gets
          0  physical reads
          0  redo size
     721203  bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
      36927  bytes received via SQL*Net from client
       3324  SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
          0  sorts (memory)
          0  sorts (disk)
      49838  rows processed

SQL> SELECT /*+ INDEX(T i_t_object_id) */ OBJECT_ID FROM T_XIFENFEI;

49838 rows selected.


Execution Plan
----------------------------------------------------------
Plan hash value: 548923532

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id  | Operation         | Name       | Rows  | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT  |            | 49838 |   243K|    57   (2)| 00:00:01 |
|   1 |  TABLE ACCESS FULL| T_XIFENFEI | 49838 |   243K|    57   (2)| 00:00:01 |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Statistics
----------------------------------------------------------
          1  recursive calls
          0  db block gets
       3544  consistent gets
          0  physical reads
          0  redo size
     721203  bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
      36927  bytes received via SQL*Net from client
       3324  SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
          0  sorts (memory)
          0  sorts (disk)
      49838  rows processed

从上面的执行计划中可知,此时走了全表扫描. 由于我们需要查询的列为object_id,因此理论上只需要读取索引就应该可以返回所有数据,而此时为什么是全表扫描呢？ 这是因为NULL值与索引的特性所决定的.即null值不会被存储到B树索引.因此应该为表 t_xifenfei 的列 object_id 添加 not null 约束.

INDEX FAST FULL SCAN

SQL> alter table t_xifenfei modify(object_id not null);   

Table altered.

SQL> SELECT  object_id from t_xifenfei;

49838 rows selected.


Execution Plan
----------------------------------------------------------
Plan hash value: 2036340805

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id  | Operation            | Name          | Rows  | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT     |               | 49838 |   243K|    27   (4)| 00:00:01 |
|   1 |  INDEX FAST FULL SCAN| I_T_OBJECT_ID | 49838 |   243K|    27   (4)| 00:00:01 |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Statistics
----------------------------------------------------------
          1  recursive calls
          0  db block gets
       3432  consistent gets
          0  physical reads
          0  redo size
     721203  bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
      36927  bytes received via SQL*Net from client
       3324  SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
          0  sorts (memory)
          0  sorts (disk)
      49838  rows processed

INDEX FAST FULL SCAN:当在高速缓存中没有找到所需的索引块时,则根据db_file_multiblock_read_count的值进行多块读操作.对于索引的分支结构只是简单的获取,然后扫描所有的叶结点.其结果是导致索引结构没有访问,获取的数据没有根据索引键的顺序排序.INDEX FAST FULL SCAN使用multiblock_read,故产生db file scattered reads 事件.

INDEX RANGE SCAN

SQL> select object_id from t_xifenfei where object_id<10;

8 rows selected.


Execution Plan
----------------------------------------------------------
Plan hash value: 2197008162

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id  | Operation        | Name          | Rows  | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT |               |     2 |    10 |     2   (0)| 00:00:01 |
|*  1 |  INDEX RANGE SCAN| I_T_OBJECT_ID |     2 |    10 |     2   (0)| 00:00:01 |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
---------------------------------------------------

   1 - access("OBJECT_ID"<10)


Statistics
----------------------------------------------------------
          1  recursive calls
          0  db block gets
          3  consistent gets
          0  physical reads
          0  redo size
        499  bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
        385  bytes received via SQL*Net from client
          2  SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
          0  sorts (memory)
          0  sorts (disk)
          8  rows processed

SQL> select /*+ index_ffs(t i_t_object_id) */ object_id from t_xifenfei t where object_id<10;

8 rows selected.


Execution Plan
----------------------------------------------------------
Plan hash value: 2036340805

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id  | Operation            | Name          | Rows  | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT     |               |     2 |    10 |    27   (4)| 00:00:01 |
|*  1 |  INDEX FAST FULL SCAN| I_T_OBJECT_ID |     2 |    10 |    27   (4)| 00:00:01 |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
---------------------------------------------------

   1 - filter("OBJECT_ID"<10)


Statistics
----------------------------------------------------------
          1  recursive calls
          0  db block gets
        118  consistent gets
          0  physical reads
          0  redo size
        499  bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
        385  bytes received via SQL*Net from client
          2  SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
          0  sorts (memory)
          0  sorts (disk)
          8  rows processed
1
这里可以看出index_ffs已经生效,但是对于这样的情况hint index_ffs效率一般来说不会太高.
<br>
<strong>INDEX FULL SCAN</strong>
1
SQL> SELECT /*+ INDEX(T i_t_object_id) */ object_id  from t_xifenfei t;

49838 rows selected.


Execution Plan
----------------------------------------------------------
Plan hash value: 431110666

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id  | Operation        | Name          | Rows  | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT |               | 49838 |   243K|   113   (2)| 00:00:02 |
|   1 |  INDEX FULL SCAN | I_T_OBJECT_ID | 49838 |   243K|   113   (2)| 00:00:02 |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Statistics
----------------------------------------------------------
          1  recursive calls
          0  db block gets
       3426  consistent gets
          0  physical reads
          0  redo size
     721203  bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
      36927  bytes received via SQL*Net from client
       3324  SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
          0  sorts (memory)
          0  sorts (disk)
      49838  rows processed

INDEX FULL SCAN:完全按照索引存储的顺序依次访问整个索引树.当访问到叶结点之后,按照双向链表方式读取相连节点的值.换言之,对于索引上所有的数据是按照有序的方式来读取的.如果索引块没有在高速缓存中被找到时,则需要从数据文件中单块进行读取.对于需要读取大量数据的全索引扫描而言,这将使其变得低效.INDEX FULL SCAN使用single read,故产生db file sequential reads事件.新版的Oracle支持db file parallel reads方式.
HINT INDEX不会使用INDEX FAST FULL SCAN功能.

INDEX列ORDER BY

SQL> SELECT OBJECT_ID FROM T_XIFENFEI order by object_id ;

49838 rows selected.


Execution Plan
----------------------------------------------------------
Plan hash value: 431110666

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id  | Operation        | Name          | Rows  | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT |               | 49838 |   243K|   113   (2)| 00:00:02 |
|   1 |  INDEX FULL SCAN | I_T_OBJECT_ID | 49838 |   243K|   113   (2)| 00:00:02 |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Statistics
----------------------------------------------------------
          1  recursive calls
          0  db block gets
       3426  consistent gets
          0  physical reads
          0  redo size
     721203  bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
      36927  bytes received via SQL*Net from client
       3324  SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
          0  sorts (memory)
          0  sorts (disk)
      49838  rows processed

SQL> SELECT OBJECT_ID FROM T_XIFENFEI order by object_id  desc;

49838 rows selected.


Execution Plan
----------------------------------------------------------
Plan hash value: 2808014233

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id  | Operation                  | Name          | Rows  | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT           |               | 49838 |   243K|   113   (2)| 00:00:02 |
|   1 |  INDEX FULL SCAN DESCENDING| I_T_OBJECT_ID | 49838 |   243K|   113   (2)| 00:00:02 |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Statistics
----------------------------------------------------------
          1  recursive calls
          0  db block gets
       3427  consistent gets
          0  physical reads
          0  redo size
     721203  bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
      36927  bytes received via SQL*Net from client
       3324  SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
          0  sorts (memory)
          0  sorts (disk)
      49838  rows processed

SQL> SELECT  /*+ index_ffs(t i_t_object_id) */ object_id from t_xifenfei t order by object_id;

49838 rows selected.


Execution Plan
----------------------------------------------------------
Plan hash value: 2527678987

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id  | Operation             | Name          | Rows  | Bytes |TempSpc| Cost (%CPU)| Time     |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT      |               | 49838 |   243K|       |   185   (4)| 00:00:03 |
|   1 |  SORT ORDER BY        |               | 49838 |   243K|  1192K|   185   (4)| 00:00:03 |
|   2 |   INDEX FAST FULL SCAN| I_T_OBJECT_ID | 49838 |   243K|       |    27   (4)| 00:00:01 |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Statistics
----------------------------------------------------------
          1  recursive calls
          0  db block gets
        117  consistent gets
          0  physical reads
          0  redo size
     721203  bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
      36927  bytes received via SQL*Net from client
       3324  SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
          1  sorts (memory)
          0  sorts (disk)
      49838  rows processed

对于index 列排序,默认情况下会使用INDEX FULL SCAN/INDEX FULL SCAN DESCENDING而不选择使用INDEX FAST FULL SCAN,因为INDEX FAST FULL SCAN获得数据后,还需要做一次SORT ORDER BY操作

INDEX FAST FULL SCAN+SORT AGGREGATE

SQL> SELECT  count(object_id) FROM T_XIFENFEI;


Execution Plan
----------------------------------------------------------
Plan hash value: 3095383276

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id  | Operation             | Name          | Rows  | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT      |               |     1 |    27   (4)| 00:00:01 |
|   1 |  SORT AGGREGATE       |               |     1 |            |          |
|   2 |   INDEX FAST FULL SCAN| I_T_OBJECT_ID | 49838 |    27   (4)| 00:00:01 |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Statistics
----------------------------------------------------------
          1  recursive calls
          0  db block gets
        117  consistent gets
          0  physical reads
          0  redo size
        421  bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
        385  bytes received via SQL*Net from client
          2  SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
          0  sorts (memory)
          0  sorts (disk)
          1  rows processed

SQL> SELECT  /*+ INDEX(T i_t_object_id) */ count(object_id) FROM T_XIFENFEI t;


Execution Plan
----------------------------------------------------------
Plan hash value: 3079973526

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id  | Operation        | Name          | Rows  | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT |               |     1 |   113   (2)| 00:00:02 |
|   1 |  SORT AGGREGATE  |               |     1 |            |          |
|   2 |   INDEX FULL SCAN| I_T_OBJECT_ID | 49838 |   113   (2)| 00:00:02 |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------


Statistics
----------------------------------------------------------
          1  recursive calls
          0  db block gets
        111  consistent gets
          0  physical reads
          0  redo size
        421  bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
        385  bytes received via SQL*Net from client
          2  SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
          0  sorts (memory)
          0  sorts (disk)
          1  rows processed

sort aggregate通常发生在使用一些聚合函数的时候,sum(),avg(),min(),max(),count()等等,实际上sort aggregate不做真正的sort,并不会用到排序空间,而是通过一个全局变量＋全表或全索引扫描来实现.这样的操作在默认情况下使用INDEX FAST FULL SCAN

INDEX FULL SCAN (MIN/MAX)

SQL> SELECT  max(object_id) FROM T_XIFENFEI;


Execution Plan
----------------------------------------------------------
Plan hash value: 2939893782

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id  | Operation                  | Name          | Rows  | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT           |               |     1 |     5 |     2   (0)| 00:00:01 |
|   1 |  SORT AGGREGATE            |               |     1 |     5 |            |          |
|   2 |   INDEX FULL SCAN (MIN/MAX)| I_T_OBJECT_ID | 49838 |   243K|     2   (0)| 00:00:01 |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Statistics
----------------------------------------------------------
          1  recursive calls
          0  db block gets
          2  consistent gets
          0  physical reads
          0  redo size
        419  bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
        385  bytes received via SQL*Net from client
          2  SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
          0  sorts (memory)
          0  sorts (disk)
          1  rows processed

SQL>  SELECT /*+ index_ffs(t i_t_object_id) */ max(object_id) FROM T_XIFENFEI t;


Execution Plan
----------------------------------------------------------
Plan hash value: 2939893782

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Id  | Operation                  | Name          | Rows  | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT           |               |     1 |     5 |    27   (4)| 00:00:01 |
|   1 |  SORT AGGREGATE            |               |     1 |     5 |            |          |
|   2 |   INDEX FULL SCAN (MIN/MAX)| I_T_OBJECT_ID | 49838 |   243K|    27   (4)| 00:00:01 |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Statistics
----------------------------------------------------------
          1  recursive calls
          0  db block gets
          2  consistent gets
          0  physical reads
          0  redo size
        419  bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
        385  bytes received via SQL*Net from client
          2  SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
          0  sorts (memory)
          0  sorts (disk)
          1  rows processed

对于这样的查询INDEX FULL SCAN (MIN/MAX)明显是最优,但是此处奇怪的是使用了index_ffs提示无效,如果有知道的朋友,麻烦告知原因.

发表在 Oracle | 评论关闭

ORA-00600[KSSADP1]

发表于 2012 年 4 月 20 日 由 惜分飞

检查数据库发现ORA-00600[KSSADP1]错误

Thu Apr 19 21:16:45 2012
Errors in file /oracle9/app/admin/crm/udump/crm1_ora_442896.trc:
ORA-00600: internal error code, arguments: [KSSADP1], [], [], [], [], [], [], []
Thu Apr 19 21:16:45 2012
Errors in file /oracle9/app/admin/crm/udump/crm1_ora_442896.trc:
ORA-00600: internal error code, arguments: [KSSADP1], [], [], [], [], [], [], []
Thu Apr 19 21:16:45 2012
Trace dumping is performing id=[cdmp_20120419211645]
Thu Apr 19 21:16:46 2012
Errors in file /oracle9/app/admin/crm/udump/crm1_ora_442896.trc:
ORA-00600: internal error code, arguments: [KSSADP1], [], [], [], [], [], [], []
Thu Apr 19 21:16:47 2012
Errors in file /oracle9/app/admin/crm/udump/crm1_ora_442896.trc:
ORA-00600: internal error code, arguments: [KSSADP1], [], [], [], [], [], [], []

分析crm1_ora_442896.trc信息

Oracle9i Enterprise Edition Release 9.2.0.8.0 - 64bit Production
With the Partitioning, Real Application Clusters, OLAP and Oracle Data Mining options
JServer Release 9.2.0.8.0 - Production
ORACLE_HOME = /oracle9/app/product/9.2.0
System name:    AIX
Node name:      zwq_crm1
Release:        3
Version:        5
Machine:        00C420B44C00
Instance name: crm1
Redo thread mounted by this instance: 1
Oracle process number: 2354
Unix process pid: 442896, image: oracle@zwq_crm1 (TNS V1-V3)

*** SESSION ID:(927.39278) 2012-04-19 21:16:45.317
*** 2012-04-19 21:16:45.317
ksedmp: internal or fatal error
ORA-00600: internal error code, arguments: [KSSADP1], [], [], [], [], [], [], []
----- Call Stack Trace -----
calling              call     entry                argument values in hex      
location             type     point                (? means dubious value)     
-------------------- -------- -------------------- ----------------------------
ksedmp+0148          bl       ksedst               1029746FC ?
ksfdmp+0018          bl       01FD4014             
kgerinv+00e8         bl       _ptrgl               
kgesinv+0020         bl       kgerinv              9001000A02B56F8 ?
                                                   9001000A02B9450 ?
                                                   FFFFFFFFFFF8430 ? 000000458 ?
                                                   900000000CBAFA4 ?
ksesin+005c          bl       kgesinv              FFFFFFFFFFF88E0 ? 1101FAF78 ?
                                                   900000000C0ECC0 ? 000010000 ?
                                                   000000002 ?
kssadpm_stage+00c4   bl       ksesin               102973C84 ? 000000000 ?
                                                   00000001E ? 000000000 ?
                                                   000000069 ? 00000000C ?
                                                   000000000 ? 000000000 ?
ksqgel+0138          bl       kssadpm_stage        000000000 ? 000000000 ?
                                                   000000000 ? 000000000 ?
kcftis+003c          bl       ksqgel               000000000 ? 4029C61E0 ?
                                                   000000002 ? 0FFFFC16C ?
                                                   102A7977C ? 000000000 ?
                                                   000000003 ? 002A36408 ?
kcfhis+001c          bl       kcftis               
krbbcc+0238          bl       kcfhis               11043B590 ?
krbpgc+001c          bl       krbbcc               
ksmupg+0074          bl       _ptrgl               
ksuded+00b8          bl       ksmupg               102924988 ? 000000020 ?
ksupucg+10ec         bl       ksuded               700000C376F5740 ? 000000000 ?
                                                   000000000 ?
opiodr+0474          bl       ksupucg              100000001 ?
ttcpip+0cc4          bl       _ptrgl               
opitsk+0d60          bl       ttcpip               11000CF90 ?
                                                   442442216B736800 ?
                                                   FFFFFFFFFFFBF00 ? 1102E04BC ?
                                                   1102D7D20 ? 0000006A0 ?
                                                   1102D83C0 ? 0000006A0 ?
opiino+0758          bl       opitsk               000000000 ? 000000000 ?
opiodr+08cc          bl       _ptrgl               
opidrv+032c          bl       opiodr               3C00000018 ? 4101FAF78 ?
                                                   FFFFFFFFFFFF840 ? 0A000F350 ?
sou2o+0028           bl       opidrv               3C0C000000 ? 4A00E8B50 ?
                                                   FFFFFFFFFFFF840 ?
main+0138            bl       01FD3A28             
__start+0098         bl       main                 000000000 ? 000000000 ?
 
--------------------- Binary Stack Dump ---------------------

Cursor Dump:
----------------------------------------
Cursor 1 (110360418): CURROW  curiob: 110369b78
 curflg: 46 curpar: 0 curusr: 0 curses 700000c376f5740
 cursor name: select nvl(max(cpmid),0) from x$kcccp                                        where cpsta = 2
 child pin: 0, child lock: 700000d9b9c5bb8, parent lock: 700000d088e0fa0
 xscflg: 1100024, parent handle: 70000031d588d88, xscfl2: 4040401
 bhp size: 160/600
----------------------------------------
Cursor 2 (110360468): CURBOUND  curiob: 1103656f0
 curflg: c7 curpar: 0 curusr: 0 curses 700000c376f5740
 cursor name: SELECT SUBSTR(VERSION,1,INSTR(VERSION,'.') - 1 )   FROM V$INSTANCE
 child pin: 0, child lock: 700000d21e60930, parent lock: 700000327837ce0
 xscflg: 141024, parent handle: 700000304e2f020, xscfl2: 4000401
 bhp size: 160/600
----------------------------------------
Cursor 3 (1103604b8): CURBOUND  curiob: 1103b6aa8
 curflg: c7 curpar: 0 curusr: 0 curses 700000c376f5740
 cursor name: SELECT SUBSTR(VERSION,1 + INSTR(VERSION,'.',1,1) ,INSTR(VERSION,'.',1,2) - 
 INSTR(VERSION,'.',1,1)  - 1 )   FROM V$INSTANCE
 child pin: 0, child lock: 700000d5e382ee8, parent lock: 700000c93581d40
 xscflg: 141024, parent handle: 700000d73daa1c0, xscfl2: 4000401
 bhp size: 160/600
----------------------------------------
Cursor 4 (110360508): CURBOUND  curiob: 1103b66b8
 curflg: c7 curpar: 0 curusr: 0 curses 700000c376f5740
 cursor name: SELECT SUBSTR(VERSION,1 + INSTR(VERSION,'.',1,2) ,INSTR(VERSION,'.',1,3) - 
 INSTR(VERSION,'.',1,2)  - 1 )   FROM V$INSTANCE
 child pin: 0, child lock: 700000d16de7978, parent lock: 700000c44059d30
 xscflg: 141024, parent handle: 700000259c4a700, xscfl2: 4000401
 bhp size: 160/600
----------------------------------------
Cursor 5 (110360558): CURBOUND  curiob: 1103b3868
 curflg: 46 curpar: 0 curusr: 0 curses 700000c376f5740
 cursor name: SELECT SYSDATE   FROM SYS.DUAL
 child pin: 0, child lock: 700000d589cea48, parent lock: 70000026b311fb0
 xscflg: 100024, parent handle: 700000d2eaee328, xscfl2: 4600409
 bhp size: 280/632
----------------------------------------
Cursor 6 (1103605a8): CURBOUND  curiob: 1103b3408
 curflg: 46 curpar: 0 curusr: 0 curses 700000c376f5740
 cursor name: SELECT TO_CHAR(SYSDATE,'YYYY','NLS_CALENDAR=Gregorian'),TO_CHAR(SYSDATE,'MM','NLS_CALENDAR=Gregorian'),
TO_CHAR(SYSDATE,'DD','NLS_CALENDAR=Gregorian') FROM X$DUAL
 child pin: 0, child lock: 70000033f1753c8, parent lock: 700000db8c6dd18
 xscflg: 100024, parent handle: 700000cbc6ad8b0, xscfl2: 4600409
 bhp size: 160/600
End of cursor dump
ksedmp: no current context area
----- Dump of the Fixed PGA -----

找到相关文档Note:262996.1,经过分析,产生错误的原因是由在本版本的数据库中SGA管理中存在的漏洞造成,但此错误没有对数据库的数据造成损坏及性能影响.

处理建议
1．当前版本ORACLE已经不再提供补丁支持,建议升级到高版本解决(有sr中介绍10.2中解决);
2．由于此报错并没有对数据库的数据及性能造成损坏及影响,可以忽此错误。

发表在 ORA-xxxxx | 标签为 , , | 一条评论

记录一次ARC1: Destination LOG_ARCHIVE_DEST_2 network reconnect abandoned解决

发表于 2012 年 4 月 19 日 由 惜分飞

Data Guard主库出现如下错误
导致归档日志不同通过LOG_ARCHIVE_DEST_2传输到备库

Thu Apr 19 19:58:40 2012
Errors in file /u01/app/oracle/admin/orcl/udump/orcl_ora_6756.trc:
Thu Apr 19 19:58:40 2012
Errors in file /u01/app/oracle/admin/orcl/udump/orcl_ora_6756.trc:
Thu Apr 19 19:58:40 2012
Errors in file /u01/app/oracle/admin/orcl/udump/orcl_ora_6756.trc:
Thu Apr 19 20:00:26 2012
ARC1: Attempting destination LOG_ARCHIVE_DEST_2 network reconnect (3113)
ARC1: Destination LOG_ARCHIVE_DEST_2 network reconnect abandoned
PING[ARC1]: Error 3113 when pinging standby standby.
Thu Apr 19 20:18:18 2012
Errors in file /u01/app/oracle/admin/orcl/udump/orcl_ora_6756.trc:
Thu Apr 19 20:18:18 2012
Errors in file /u01/app/oracle/admin/orcl/udump/orcl_ora_6756.trc:
Thu Apr 19 20:18:18 2012
Errors in file /u01/app/oracle/admin/orcl/udump/orcl_ora_6756.trc:
Thu Apr 19 20:33:27 2012
ARC1: Attempting destination LOG_ARCHIVE_DEST_2 network reconnect (3113)
ARC1: Destination LOG_ARCHIVE_DEST_2 network reconnect abandoned 

[oracle@localhost ~]$ oerr ora 3113
03113, 00000, "end-of-file on communication channel"
// *Cause: The connection between Client and Server process was broken.
// *Action: There was a communication error that requires further investigation.
//          First, check for network problems and review the SQL*Net setup. 
//          Also, look in the alert.log file for any errors. Finally, test to 
//          see whether the server process is dead and whether a trace file
//          was generated at failure time.
提示连接错误

orcl_ora_6756.trc文件内容
这里没有得任何重要的有效信息

Oracle Database 10g Enterprise Edition Release 10.2.0.1.0 - 64bit Production
With the Partitioning, OLAP and Data Mining options
ORACLE_HOME = /u01/app/oracle/product/10.2.0/db_1
System name:    Linux
Node name:      fcdb1
Release:        2.6.18-194.el5
Version:        #1 SMP Fri Apr 2 14:58:14 EDT 2010
Machine:        x86_64
Instance name: orcl
Redo thread mounted by this instance: 1
Oracle process number: 21
Unix process pid: 6756, image: oracle@fcdb1 (TNS V1-V3)

*** 2012-04-19 19:51:32.033
*** ACTION NAME:(0000045 STARTED16) 2012-04-19 19:51:32.026
*** MODULE NAME:(backup incr datafile) 2012-04-19 19:51:32.026
*** SERVICE NAME:(SYS$USERS) 2012-04-19 19:51:32.026
*** SESSION ID:(1518.294) 2012-04-19 19:51:32.026
*** ACTION NAME:(0000062 STARTED68) 2012-04-19 19:58:40.083
*** MODULE NAME:(backup full datafile) 2012-04-19 19:58:40.083
*** 2012-04-19 19:58:40.083
*** ACTION NAME:(0000068 STARTED16) 2012-04-19 19:58:40.156
*** 2012-04-19 20:18:18.436
*** ACTION NAME:(0000118 STARTED16) 2012-04-19 20:18:18.436
*** MODULE NAME:(backup incr datafile) 2012-04-19 20:18:18.436

查看相关参数

SQL> show parameter archive;

NAME                                 TYPE        VALUE
------------------------------------ ----------- ------------------------------
log_archive_config                   string      DG_CONFIG=(primary,standby)
log_archive_dest_1                   string      LOCATION=/u01/app/oracle/arch
                                                 VALID_FOR=(ALL_LOGFILES,ALL_RO
                                                 LES) DB_UNIQUE_NAME=primary
log_archive_dest_2                   string      SERVICE=standby LGWR ASYNC VAL
                                                 ID_FOR=(ONLINE_LOGFILES,PRIMAR
                                                 Y_ROLE) DB_UNIQUE_NAME=standby 
log_archive_dest_state_1             string      ENABLE
log_archive_dest_state_2             string      ENABLE

测试TNS

[oracle@fcdb1 bdump]$ tnsping standby

TNS Ping Utility for Linux: Version 10.2.0.1.0 - Production on 19-APR-2012 20:47:51

Copyright (c) 1997, 2005, Oracle.  All rights reserved.

Used parameter files:


Used TNSNAMES adapter to resolve the alias
Attempting to contact (DESCRIPTION = (ADDRESS_LIST = (ADDRESS = (PROTOCOL = TCP)(HOST = 192.168.1.203)(PORT = 1521))) 
(CONNECT_DATA = (SERVER = DEDICATED) (SERVICE_NAME = orcl)))
OK (0 msec)

[oracle@fcdb1 bdump]$ sqlplus sys/oracle@standby as sysdba

SQL*Plus: Release 10.2.0.1.0 - Production on Thu Apr 19 20:49:05 2012

Copyright (c) 1982, 2005, Oracle.  All rights reserved.


Connected to:
Oracle Database 10g Enterprise Edition Release 10.2.0.1.0 - 64bit Production
With the Partitioning, OLAP and Data Mining options

问题原因分析
从log_archive_dest_2 参数上可以看出默认是配置lgwr进程传输日志，但是因为备库没有配置standby redo log，所以使得启动arch传输日志，然后出现该问题，因为在传输过程中出现异常，导致arch不能继续和备库建立连接。

解决方法
查看了很多资料，给出的解决方法都是重启主库或者备库解决，我想既然是ARCH建立连接的失败，那么重启log_archive_dest_state_2参数，让arch进程重启。

SQL> ALTER SYSTEM SET log_archive_dest_state_2='DEFER' SCOPE=BOTH;

System altered.

SQL> ALTER SYSTEM SET log_archive_dest_state_2='ENABLE' SCOPE=BOTH;

System altered.

SQL> alter system switch logfile;

System altered.


--alert日志
Thu Apr 19 20:51:12 2012
ALTER SYSTEM SET log_archive_dest_state_2='DEFER' SCOPE=BOTH;
Thu Apr 19 20:51:32 2012
ALTER SYSTEM SET log_archive_dest_state_2='ENABLE' SCOPE=BOTH;
LNS1 started with pid=35, OS id=7012
Thu Apr 19 20:51:47 2012
Thread 1 advanced to log sequence 2025
  Current log# 2 seq# 2025 mem# 0: /u01/app/oracle/oradata/orcl/redo02.log
Thu Apr 19 20:51:48 2012
******************************************************************
LGWR: Setting 'active' archival for destination LOG_ARCHIVE_DEST_2
******************************************************************
Thu Apr 19 20:52:02 2012
Thread 1 advanced to log sequence 2026
  Current log# 3 seq# 2026 mem# 0: /u01/app/oracle/oradata/orcl/redo03.log
Thread 1 cannot allocate new log, sequence 2027

这个时候，查看备库日志也已经传输过去，通过修改log_archive_dest_state_2解决

ARC1: Attempting destination LOG_ARCHIVE_DEST_2 network reconnect (3113)
ARC1: Destination LOG_ARCHIVE_DEST_2 network reconnect abandoned
发表在 Oracle | 评论关闭