Why don't you cache 3 rows in the application? You would avoid all
kind of problems with concurrent access then.
2006/4/20, Ranko Mosic <ranko.mosic_at_gmail.com>:
>
> Thanks all for their responses. I apologize for not having more detail -
> this is yet another
> 4 pm issue. Version is 9.2.0.x. This table has only 3 ( three ) rows, so any
> points relating to pk/indexes/IOT etc don't apply here.
> Why is this bad thing ? I don't know, I asked client the same question, but
> they seem sure
> they are seeing problem. I didn't have chance yet to have direct look at the
> problem.
> Caching is current idea and also suggested by Oracle Consulting.
> I am not sure how much it will help though - block is cached anyway, so
> buffer cache latch will be replaced with shared pool latch. Spreading
> accross 3 blocks is also considered.
--
Best regards,
Alex Gorbachev
--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Received on Fri Apr 21 2006 - 06:26:14 CDT
