RE: DBA_HIST_SQLSTAT

From: <Christopher.Taylor2_at_parallon.net>
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2012 10:00:53 -0600
Message-ID: <F05D8DF1FB25F44085DB74CB916678E885652B860C_at_NADCWPMSGCMS10.hca.corpad.net>

Dom,
Thanks for the tips - I think force_matching_signature may be the way to go as that makes the analysis SQL easier to manage to gather the data I'm looking for.

Thanks again.

Chris

From: Taylor Christopher - Nashville
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2012 9:41 AM To: 'Dominic Brooks'
Cc: oracle-l_at_freelists.org
Subject: RE: DBA_HIST_SQLSTAT

Yep that's the way I was leaning - using a substr match on the first 800 chars for now. I may have to limit that to less. I need to go back and check on the force_matching_signature though.

Thanks

Chris

From: Dominic Brooks [mailto:dombrooks_at_hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2012 9:38 AM To: Taylor Christopher - Nashville
Cc: oracle-l_at_freelists.org<mailto:oracle-l_at_freelists.org> Subject: RE: DBA_HIST_SQLSTAT

For statements that differ only by literals then you can use force_matching_signature as a grouping mechanism.

Otherwise, if you have statements where the core statement is the same but have additional predicates then I think you'll have to resort to string matching on substr or alike.

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

Received on Wed Nov 21 2012 - 17:00:53 CET