Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid

Home -> Community -> Mailing Lists -> Oracle-L -> RE: Any way to invalidate/flush a single cursor

RE: Any way to invalidate/flush a single cursor

From: Allen, Brandon <>
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2006 09:59:48 -0700
Message-ID: <04DDF147ED3A0D42B48A48A18D574C45059E1E9F@NT15.oneneck.corp>

Cool - I got through the first hurdle and Oracle Support actually created an enhancment request - from my SR:  

07-SEP-06 11:22:10 GMT UPDATE

Hi Brandon,

For this issue I have created a new Enhancement Request .The number of ER is 5517148.  

[] On Behalf Of Allen, Brandon

	Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2006 10:06 AM
	To: Tanel Poder; ORACLE-L
	Subject: RE: Any way to invalidate/flush a single cursor
	Thanks Tanel, that's a great idea and seems like it would work
very well for testing, but in some cases I actually need to do this in production (I forgot to mention that in my original post) in order to reset a poorly performing execution plan so the bind variables will be peeked again and Oracle will come up with a more appropriate plan. This is where I really need to prevent the mass invalidation of all cursors dependent on a given object and I can't use the view method here with the COTS app. I wish Oracle would just add a simple procedure like dbms_shared_pool.invalidate('<hash_value>'). It seems like it would be simple and useful enough. I can't be the only one encountering this problem. Maybe I'll open an enhancement request and see how that goes - never tried one before.          

        Looking forward to your published paper, although it sounds like it might not be safe for a production environment ;-) I

Privileged/Confidential Information may be contained in this message or attachments hereto. Please advise immediately if you or your employer do not consent to Internet email for messages of this kind. Opinions, conclusions and other information in this message that do not relate to the official business of this company shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by it.

Received on Thu Sep 07 2006 - 11:59:48 CDT

Original text of this message