Database Ghosts

phantasmripRecently you may have seen my first article on this topic over at SQL Solutions Group.  If not, here is the link so you can read that article first before proceeding here.  This article is intended as a first of two part follow-up to that article.

Now that you have read that other article, we can recap it a little bit.

You will recall that in that article, I discussed the presence of Ghosts in your database.  I also discussed that those ghosts are a good thing.  They have some benefits to them, of which is a bit of a performance boost for some operations like the rollback of a delete.

In that article I discussed one method with which you could see these ghost records.  In this article, I would like to share an alternate method to be able to see these ghosts.

In order to explore this alternate means, let’s go ahead and follow the first few steps from the other article to get the setup complete so our second ghost hunting foray can begin.

Now with the setup complete, we should once again confirm that we have appropriate data available for the hunt.  Once again a simple query can suffice to show the data.

Upon execution of the check script, we should see something similar to the following data-set.

datasample

 

Great, the data is confirmed and we should have a wonderful chance to find some ghosts once again.  In the previous attempt, we needed an additional plasma blaster in the form of a trace flag.  In this attempt we will hunt these ghosts without that tool and see what we can find.  Why attempt it in this way?  Well, it is simply because I’d rather not use a trace flag if it is not necessary.  If you recall, that trace flag had a couple of noted effects.  One of the effects was that it turned off the ghost cleanup process.  If I can avoid it, I’d rather leave the containment unit in tact.

Now, due to that clerical error of putting Halloween on the wrong date, we need to follow the prescribed policy to delete records prior to creating the proper records.

Notice that we issued the delete in a transaction this time around.  We are going to leave that transaction open for a bit while we hunt those ghosts.

The first step is to verify that some ghosts might be present.  To do that we should run a query such as the following.

From that query we should see something like the following.

idxstats_ghosts

Once again we are on the right track.  We can further confirm the existence of these ghosts through a little more investigation and monitoring.  Let’s try the trick with the dblog function again.

With that query, we should see something like the following result set.

dblog_ghosts

 

Very cool.  We once again can see that these phantasms are in the database.  We have enough information that we can proceed on to the next stage.  We can pass the PageID into DBCC PAGE in order to investigate the ghosts on the page.  If we use the PageID that is circled with the green in the preceding result set, we can get a better feel for these specters.

And we may see results such as the following.

page_ghosts2

Recall that the log says this page has ghost records on it.  When we check the page with DBCC PAGE we can definitely see that there are ghosts on the page.  This is very cool.  Now, had we tried to check for ghost records on the PFS page we would not be able to see the ghost count like we were able to see by enabling the TF.

Once again we have been able to display the existence of ghosts in the database.  In order to get these ghosts to move on from the database to their afterlife, we merely need to commit the transaction or roll back the transaction.

Stay tuned for the next article in this mini-series about ghosts.  Who knows, we may even have a bonus Halloween article since this is Halloween month.

Part III of the series can now be found here.

3 Comments - Leave a comment
  1. Sam says:

    A typical case of the basic ‘dirty read’ anomaly explained a complex way ?

    • Jason Brimhall says:

      I wouldn’t call this the dirty read phenomenon. The record marked as ghost should not be picked up as a dirty read.

  2. Jason Brimhall says:

    FWIW – Part III of the series can be found at http://bit.ly/rnnrGhosts2

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *










Calendar
October 2014
M T W T F S S
« Sep   Nov »
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031  
Content
SQLHelp

SQLHelp

  • @live_sql: #sqlhelp Is there a way to allow users attach DB's using the GUI and them not being SA. I crested custom server roles but still no GUI?
  • @joachimpr: Are your reports at work always taking forever to show you data? This could be the reason why! #SQLServer #sqlhelp
  • @NickyvV: Did anyone ever find a solution for memory consumtion of PP in Excel 2010 that @Kjonge made for 2013 and SSAS? #sqlhelp #ssashelp
  • @Ranjeeth: Can I have DBSer01, DBServ02 having replicas in DBServ03(2 AGs, diff clusters one target). #sqlhelp #alwayson trying to save testing time.
  • @jdanton: @Sir_NiN_Sir both free, but dev=enterprise, feature wise, express, much more limited. For learning, I’d go dev, or just use Docker. #sqlhelp
  • @Sir_NiN_Sir: How's different MSSQL Developer edition and Express edition? both edition for free licensed or not? If I need to practice t-sql.#sqlhelp
  • @jdanton: @Spinner_ Nope. Added a bunch of features to it, as it of SP1 2016. #sqlhelp
  • @Spinner_: #sqlhelp are Microsoft's deprecating sql server express?
  • @SQLHA: @ke0mms Would need to know about your issue before I could even think about giving an answer. #sqlhelp
  • @SQLHA: @ke0mms What do you mean by availability server? That's not a "thing" :) #sqlhelp

Welcome , today is Wednesday, July 26, 2017