Re: shared_pool_reserved_size and sga

From: David Roberts <big.dave.roberts_at_googlemail.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2010 10:54:22 +0100
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=scDBtFXN7goFQBEuGCagtmxzzdAU_FSXUqbSq_at_mail.gmail.com>

28 bytes seems an incredibly small amount to be unable to allocate.

As you are using Advanced Queueing, there may be value in reviewing Jonathan Lewis's post on analysing the contents of the shared pool related to DBMS_PIPEs as thes can function in a similar manner:

http://jonathanlewis.wordpress.com/2009/01/30/pipes/

Dave
<http://jonathanlewis.wordpress.com/2009/01/30/pipes/> On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 8:58 AM, Andreas Piesk <a.piesk_at_gmx.net> wrote:

> Ram Raman schrieb:
> >
> > Cursor_sharing has been similar all along. I thought
> > cursor_sharing=force was not a good idea at all, IIRC Wolfgang said that?
>
> well, the whole cursor_sharing thing is not a good idea because it works
> around problems which
> should be fixed in the application but sometimes you have no choice.
>
> so if you see a lots of childs per cursor setting cursor_sharing=force
> might help.
>
> but as Tim pointed out, first determine which portion of shared pool grows
> by comparing hourly
> snapshots of v$sgastat or AWR snapshots.
>
> regards,
> -ap
> --
> http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
>
>
>

--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l

Received on Fri Aug 20 2010 - 04:54:22 CDT