Re: SGA_TARGET substantially less than SGA_MAX_SIZE ?

From: Ls Cheng <exriscer_at_gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2014 11:57:45 +0200
Message-ID: <CAJ2-Qb-_qffH8QazJ7S_awG0nH5CSde1A8hF14jsHOdUaSXuuw_at_mail.gmail.com>



Hi

Setting sga_max_size is only useful in Solars due to DISM feature, and for me it's a 9i parameter, should not be used 10g+.

For other platforms IMHO it's a waste of resources and useless parameter because the memory is allocated by sga_max_size, if you se 48G for max size and 12G for target then 36GB is wasted, database only manages 12GB but OS allocated 48GB.

Thanks

On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 1:05 AM, kyle Hailey <kylelf_at_gmail.com> wrote:

>
> Is there any reason to run SGA_TARGET substantially less than
> SGA_MAX_SIZE?
>
> For example is there any reason to run MAX=48GB, TARGET=12GB instead of
> just running MAX at say 10% over TARGET to give some wiggle room?
>
> Another way to put it: what are the pros and cons of running SGA_TARGET
> substantially less than SGA_MAX_SIZE ?
>
> Thanks
> Kyle
>
>

--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Received on Tue Aug 12 2014 - 11:57:45 CEST

Original text of this message