Re: Memory utilization (was SGA/PGA and virtual memory)

Gus Spier <gus_at_shirenet.com> wrote in article <332A45D4.5714_at_shirenet.com>...
 wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I read in several places that SGA should take 30% of real memory
 available.
> > probably mr. dischner used a larger sga size (which caused swapping)
 and
> > found out that
> > a smaller one behaves better, while mr. wartenberg used a small sga in
 the
> > first place, just to find out that enlarging it is payfull.
> >
> > Just an hypothese .
> >
> > I'm working excellently with 30% Real memo sga.
> >
> > yours,
> >
> > Muli Koppel
>
> Here's a question for you all.
>
> Has anybody used a technique called "pinning a package" in memory?
>
> The allegation is that if frequently used packages are "pinned" in the
> SGA, performance is improved. Of course, the obvious trade off is that a
 

> portion (>10,000k) of memory will be unavailable for the rest of the
> database and users. In return, Oracle will not have to call up the
> package, use it, and flush it when finished with it.
>
> Will the anticipated performance improvement be worth the commitment?
>
> Gus
>
>
>

Hello Gus,

Abviously there is a trade off here, but u must consider pinning packages seriously, as it keeps
on the MRU side of the Library Cache lru list your packages. Bigger your packages are, bigger are the chances they'll be aged out of memory. Private Error messages packages, Private Menu Packages etc - which are frequently accessed - are all worth keeping.

And by the way, the cache option for tables and indexes has the same effect on the Buffer Cache.

Muli Koppel Received on Sun Mar 16 1997 - 00:00:00 CST