Hi Mike, the parameters was ok, and they solved the problem (5 years ago)
But 5 years after (now), the situation reversed and I had to comment them
out.
To get the optimize choose the right way.
On 2/7/06, Mike Killough <mwkillough_at_hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> This is why I always set the parameters generic in test and force them to
> reprove their need, before including them in the upgrade.
>
> Mike
>
>
>
> >From: Juan Carlos Reyes Pacheco <juancarlosreyesp_at_gmail.com>
> >Reply-To: juancarlosreyesp_at_gmail.com
> >To: oracle-l_at_freelists.org, jonathan_at_jlcomp.demon.co.uk
> >Subject: The responsible
> >Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2006 12:46:54 -0400
> >
> >HI I want to share this info, not asking.
> >
> >Some years ago I changed the optimizer parameters, and this solved a
> query,
> >from minutes to seconds
> >OPTIMIZER_INDEX_COST_ADJ = 10
> >OPTIMIZER_INDEX_CACHING = 90
> >Now the situation reversed, and I had to comment them
> >To move a process from 4 minutes to 7 seconds.
> >
> >using optimizer parameters 10,90
> >trace file 870 M
> >time 4 minutes (without trace)
> >recursive 465.43 s
> >non recursive 233.21 s
> >
> >
> >commenting optimizer parameters and leaving with their defaults
> >Trace file 6 M
> >time 7 seconds
> >recursive 5.87 s
> >non recursive 1.79 s
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >--
> >Oracle Certified Profesional 9i 10g
> >Orace Certified Professional Developer 6i
> >
> >8 years of experience in Oracle 7,8i,9i,10g and developer 6i
>
>
>
--
Oracle Certified Profesional 9i 10g
Orace Certified Professional Developer 6i
8 years of experience in Oracle 7,8i,9i,10g and developer 6i
--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Received on Tue Feb 07 2006 - 11:20:52 CST
