Re: Trying to locate a cursor with very little information
From: Chen Shapira <cshapi_at_gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2009 19:02:46 -0700
Message-ID: <e37540930907081902i45cfa93dka615b0133ba4ef14_at_mail.gmail.com>
> I agree with Kerry.
>
> I'm surprised, though, that there's no PARSING IN CURSOR #2 anywhere in the
> trace stream preceding the FETCH #2 line. Whether there's a PARSE #2 or not,
> I'd expect a PARSING IN CURSOR #2 to precede either the FETCH #2 or an EXEC
> #2 in there somewhere. What circumstance do you think caused Oracle not to
> emit the PARSING IN CURSOR section?
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2009 19:02:46 -0700
Message-ID: <e37540930907081902i45cfa93dka615b0133ba4ef14_at_mail.gmail.com>
> I agree with Kerry.
>
> I'm surprised, though, that there's no PARSING IN CURSOR #2 anywhere in the
> trace stream preceding the FETCH #2 line. Whether there's a PARSE #2 or not,
> I'd expect a PARSING IN CURSOR #2 to precede either the FETCH #2 or an EXEC
> #2 in there somewhere. What circumstance do you think caused Oracle not to
> emit the PARSING IN CURSOR section?
Ah, I expect that Oracle did not emit the parsing section. You would, however, miss the parse command if you never had access to the trace file, and got your information from listening in to the network, starting few minutes too late...
Please don't ask how I ended up doing this :) Obviously it is not a normal debugging scenario and I was perfectly justified in refusing to look for the SQL. I was just very curious if it *could* be done...
BTW, Cary, Was there a redesign on Method-R homepage? I love the new banner with the quotes :)
Thanks,
Chen
-- http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-lReceived on Wed Jul 08 2009 - 21:02:46 CDT