RE: flush shared_pool and query performance
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2008 17:18:57 -0500
Thanks, Brandon. I was doing that as a test to see what is an effect of the hard parsing. I did not expect it
to be as significant
"Allen, Brandon" <Brandon.Allen_at_On eNeck.com> To <genegurevich_at_discover.com>, 04/03/2008 05:14 <oracle-l_at_freelists.org> PM cc Subject RE: flush shared_pool and query performance
Yes, I would say .3 seconds is reasonable for a hard parse - that's why we have the shared pool and bind variables to minimize hard parsing. Parse time depends on many things such as the complexity of the query, number of tables joined, optimizer_max_permutations, contention for latches, parsing and IO required for recursive queries on the DD, etc. You might want to try restricting optimizer_max_permutations, especially if you're in pre-9i where it used to default to 80,000 I believe. Maybe check if you're doing dynamic sampling also.
[mailto:oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org] On Behalf Of genegurevich_at_discover.com
Is that reasonable for parsing to take 0.3s?
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 Apr 03 2008 - 17:18:57 CDT