Re: Trying to locate a cursor with very little information

From: Cary Millsap <>
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2009 02:10:06 -0500
Message-ID: <>


It sounds like you've had some good fun. Thank you for letting me know how you got your "top-truncated" trace data. It all makes sense now.

And *thank you*: we did redesign the home page recently. We added the new Follow Us pane on the left, and we "orthogonalized" the banner links (Software, Services, Education, Support). The flash quotes have been there for a few months, though. The goal, of course, is to help make sure people understand that we exist (I meet people all the time who still don't realize that I severed my association with Hotsos in early 2008), and that we have lots of great ways we can help people make their software go faster.

Cary Millsap
Method R Corporation

On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 9:02 PM, Chen Shapira <> wrote:

> > 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
> > #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

Received on Thu Jul 09 2009 - 02:10:06 CDT

Original text of this message