Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid
HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US
 

Home -> Community -> Mailing Lists -> Oracle-L -> RE: db buffer cache advisory clarification

RE: db buffer cache advisory clarification

From: Luca Canali <Luca.Canali_at_cern.ch>
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 12:11:20 +0200
Message-ID: <F9411E3A291FB5449991ED7E624D27F4D1928F@cernxchg20.cern.ch>


Hi Stephen,  

As for your question on consistency of the report for small cache values, I think you still have a formatting problem. If you take row N.3 for example, the column "Est Physical Read Factor" tells you that the value there is 1/0.02=50 times bigger than what is reported in row N.4, that is the cache advisor expects 50 billion physical reads (your sqlplus format string handles numbers up to 10 billion) Your next problem is to make any sense of those huge numbers.. Cheers,
Luca    


From: oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org
[mailto:oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org] On Behalf Of Stephen Anderson Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2006 11:28 AM To: jungwolf
Cc: oracle-l_at_freelists.org
Subject: Re: db buffer cache advisory clarification

Hello,  

Ran a 7 minute snap this morning - results are getting worse! Physical Reads are at 6278/s and Logical Reads are 70,844/s.  

Buffer Pool Advisory for DB: MERLIN Instance: MERLIN End Snap: 31
-> Only rows with estimated physical reads >0 are displayed
-> ordered by Block Size, Buffers For Estimate

        Size for  Size      Buffers for  Est Physical          Estimated
P   Estimate (M) Factr         Estimate   Read Factor     Physical Reads
--- ------------ ----- ---------------- ------------- ------------------

D             16    .3            1,985          0.07        124,118,645
D             32    .5            3,970          0.04         70,906,440
D             48    .8            5,955          0.02         29,259,452

D             64   1.0            7,940          1.00      1,783,067,416
D             80   1.3            9,925          0.99      1,757,988,089
...
D            256   4.0           31,760          0.85      1,523,232,446
D            272   4.3           33,745          0.85      1,507,672,223

Now we can see over 1 billion PIO's, so it cannot be a formatting thing. The metalink note that Jared suggested merely chose to format it differently.  

On 3/28/06, jungwolf <spatenau_at_gmail.com> wrote:

        Stephen,         

        This is for a 15 minute snapshot? It seems a little strange to me.

        > Size for Size Buffers for Est Physical Estimated

        > P Estimate (M) Factr Estimate Read Factor Physical Reads

	> --- ------------ ----- ---------------- -------------
------------------
	> D             64   1.0            7,940          1.00
937,436,311         

        937436311/(15*60)=1041595.9 or over 1 million physical reads per second.         

        Maybe something else is going on?         

        Steven

--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Received on Wed Mar 29 2006 - 04:11:20 CST

Original text of this message

HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US