March 24, 2011 at 7:34 pm
Anyone ever seen it do this?
SQL Server Execution Times:
CPU time = 942904 ms, elapsed time = 424792 ms.
I'm assuming that's due to parallelism, but that's the first time I've seen my CPU go for longer then my elapsed did.
Never stop learning, even if it hurts. Ego bruises are practically mandatory as you learn unless you've never risked enough to make a mistake.
For better assistance in answering your questions[/url] | Forum Netiquette
For index/tuning help, follow these directions.[/url] |Tally Tables[/url]
Twitter: @AnyWayDBA
March 24, 2011 at 11:40 pm
Parallelism. If the query paralleled 4-ways and spend a total of 2 seconds executing on each processor that's a CPU time of 8 seconds while it may have only taken 3 or 4 real-time to complete.
Gail Shaw
Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server, MVP, M.Sc (Comp Sci)
SQL In The Wild: Discussions on DB performance with occasional diversions into recoverability
March 24, 2011 at 11:44 pm
I would have figured parallelism too - it's good to know though.
Jason...AKA CirqueDeSQLeil
_______________________________________________
I have given a name to my pain...MCM SQL Server, MVP
SQL RNNR
Posting Performance Based Questions - Gail Shaw[/url]
Learn Extended Events
Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply