Please start any new threads on our new
site at https://forums.sqlteam.com. We've got lots of great SQL Server
experts to answer whatever question you can come up with.
| Author |
Topic |
|
timmy
Master Smack Fu Yak Hacker
1242 Posts |
 Posted - 2006-07-12 : 17:50:50
|
Hi all, I've come across a bit of a puzzling issue. We have a database upgrade script that (amongst other things) normalises a large table. The normalisation is done by a bit of T-SQL that uses a cursor (don't ask ). When the script is run on the customer's test environment, it is taking something like 5 hours to run. Running it here over the same db takes about 10 minutes. The details are a bit sketchy, but I'm told the remote machine is of similar hardware config to the local one (both P4 workstations, but the remote one is running NT4 whereas the local one has XP). The one difference I could find is that the customer's setup has moved some of the tables into different filegroups. Can anyone think of a possible reason why there is so great a discrepancy?Cheers,Tim |
|
|
tkizer
Almighty SQL Goddess
38200 Posts |
Posted - 2006-07-12 : 17:54:04
|
| How busy is their server? Even if it's a similar server, their server may be 20 times more busy than yours. I'd remotely connect to their machine and watch CPU utilization before, during, and after the script runs.Tara Kizeraka tduggan |
 |
|
|
timmy
Master Smack Fu Yak Hacker
1242 Posts |
Posted - 2006-07-12 : 18:43:49
|
| Thanks Tara.Given it's a test server I would imagine that the load would be relatively light. And they ran the thing overnight so the load should be fairly low. I'm wondering if might have DB consistency problems that may have caused it. Tim |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Execution times differ for same script