Category: Performance Tuning

Paul White has an excellent article on row goals:

In my experience, it is very common for people to miss the impact of row goals in execution plans.

No wonder, since before SQL Server 2017 CU3, there was no documented way to see information about row goals in execution plans! That update includes:

• Optimizer row goal information in query execution plan added in SQL Server 2017 CU3

This enhancement adds the EstimateRowsWithoutRowGoal attribute to each plan operator affected by a row goal.

The new attribute is visible in all the usual places (e.g. DMVs, plan cache) but not yet in SQL Server Management Studio graphical plans (up to and including SSMS version 17.4). The SQL Server does send the new attribute, but SSMS graphical plans strip bits out that do not match its local version of the xml plan schema.

Version 17.5 of SSMS is expected to ship with an updated xml schema and UI elements, making the new attribute visible. SentryOne Plan Explorer shows the new attribute in the raw xml view already, since it doesn’t have any reason to strip the information out, but an update will be required to incorporate the new row goal information into other places (such as the Plan Diagram). I would expect it to make its way onto tooltips first.

Definitely worth a careful read.

Manu Punna has a script to get CPU utilization by session over a relatively short timeframe:

Troubleshooting high CPU usage on a SQL Server Database is an art, but there is a defined methodology to follow to find the root cause of high CPU. This can involve breaking down the overall server CPU usage to a more granular level, first discovering that it’s SQL Server that’s the problem (because way too often it’s something else!), down to exploring specific plan operators in a particular problematic query. Finding that problematic query, identifying the high CPU consumer, means identifying the CPU usage by session.

sys.dm_exec_requests shows the CPU time, but it’s cumulative – it doesn’t give the CPU consumption by each session at the current time. You can see how much CPU usage a session has had since it started, but it doesn’t show you what’s going on right now. To explore that, we need to query sys.dm_exec_requests repeatedly, and look for the differences. We need to collect the CPU usage for a time interval to identify the high CPU consumers.

Click through for the script.

Dan Guzman inveighs against using AddWithValue in ADO.Net:

The nastiness with AddWithValue is that ADO.NET infers the parameter definition from the supplied object value. Parameters in SQL Server are inherently strongly-typed, including the SQL Server data type, length, precision, and scale. Types in .NET don’t always map precisely to SQL Server types, and are sometimes ambiguous, so AddWithValue has to makes guesses about the intended parameter type.

The guesses AddWithValue makes can have huge implications when wrong because SQL Server uses well-defined data type precedence rules when expressions involve unlike data types; the value with the lower precedence is implicitly converted to the higher type. The implicit conversion itself isn’t particularly costly but is a major performance concern when it is the column value rather than the parameter value must be converted, especially in a WHERE or JOIN clause predicate. The implicit column value conversion can prevent indexes on the column from being used with an index seek (i.e. non-sargable expression), resulting in a full scan of every row in the table or index.

Read the whole thing.

Brent Ozar covers a Microsoft paper which looks exciting:

Froid replaces the scalar UDF operator in the calling query with the newly constructed relational expression as a scalar sub-query.

That one statement comes with a lot of interesting gotchas that they discuss throughout the paper:

• You won’t see the scalar function in the plan (just like we don’t currently see single-statement inline table-valued functions by name in the plan – we just see their effects, kinda like views)

• The function and the underlying tables might have different permissions (you could have permissions on the function but not the tables, or vice versa, which makes compilation & execution a little trickier)

• Code that doesn’t get used can just get removed outright (just like SQL Server can do join elimination)

• Costs and row estimates are now useful inside the plan

To the extent that this works (and I hope it does), it helps fulfill the promise of SQL Server 2000, with encapsulation of code.  Today, one of the easiest big performance gains I can give is to strip something out of a user-defined function and inline it.

Erik Darling shows how you can use a computed column to speed up %something searches:

We were talking about computed columns, and one of our students mentioned that he uses computed columns that run the REVERSE() function on a column for easier back-searching.

What’s back-searching? It’s a word I just made up.

The easiest example to think about and demo is Social Security Numbers.

One security requirement is often to give the last four.

Obviously running this for a search WHERE ssn LIKE '%0000' would perform badly over large data sets.

One of the trickiest parts of performance tuning is understanding that the way people want to see data is not necessarily the way you should store the data.