Re: Parallel DML

From: Ram Cheruvattath <ram.cheruvattath_at_gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 17:55:02 -0400
Message-ID: <084BC64E0C4F4D249031DDFAC0124077_at_RAMPC>

Ok. Thanks Stefan. I will give it a try.

Ram

---

From: "Stefan Koehler" <contact_at_soocs.de> Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2016 5:16 PM
To: <ram.cheruvattath_at_gmail.com>; "oracle-l-freelists" <oracle-l_at_freelists.org>
Subject: Re: Parallel DML

> Hey Ram,
> just trace your case with the following hidden parameter and you gonna see
> the reason.
>
> SQL> alter session set "_px_trace"=high,all;
>
> For more information about "_px_trace" - please check out my blog post
> here: http://tinyurl.com/oxcmyp2
>
> Best Regards
> Stefan Koehler
>
> Freelance Oracle performance consultant and researcher
> Homepage: http://www.soocs.de
> Twitter: _at_OracleSK
>
>> Ram Cheruvattath <ram.cheruvattath_at_gmail.com> hat am 23. Juni 2016 um
>> 21:24 geschrieben:
>>
>> To clarify my statement below:
>>
>> "However, any increase in parallel thereafter does not result in an
>> increase in slaves."
>>
>> What I meant is "However, any increase in parallel thereafter does not
>> result in doubling of slaves."
>>
>> In other words, increasing the parallelism for INSERT and SELECT to 8
>> does not result in 16 slaves. It results in 8 slaves.
>>
>> Ram

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

Received on Thu Jun 23 2016 - 23:55:02 CEST