They probably need the 4 gig sga because they aren't using bind variables.
(sloppy programming) Look at that, bet you find a problem there. Tell them
that real experts know how to write good code. (more diplomaticaly of
course)
Jim
"Ed Stevens" <spamdump_at_nospam.noway.nohow> wrote in message
news:3dd3a433.46454908_at_ausnews.austin.ibm.com...
> On Thu, 14 Nov 2002 12:34:00 +1100, "Howard J. Rogers"
> <howardjr2000_at_yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>
> <snip>
> >That's an awful big SGA. I had a client the other week state emphatically
> >that they needed a 4GB SGA. I couldn't refute the suggestion, because
that
> >would require hands-on experience and testing, which I wasn;t going to
get
> >the opportunity to do. But I'll bet my bottom dollar it's not needed.
> >
> >Regards
> >HJR
>
> <snip>
>
> Hey, I didn't know you were working on the same project!
>
> Seriously, we just went to production this week with a new database -
8.1.7 on
> Win2k. The application vendor insisteded they needed a 4gb SGA, and a lot
of
> other stuff that raised red flags in my mind. Like you, I didn't have the
> resources to generate the hard numbers to refute them, and every objection
I
> raised was blown off with, essentially, "we're the experts, we know what
we're
> doing." THEY told US how to configure the OS. THEY told US how to
configure
> the DB. Now that we are in production THEY want US to figure out why
things are
> going south.
>
> (BTW, this is the same project I mentioned in an earlier thread and was
told to
> take my problems elsewhere. See the thread 'venting my spleen.')
> --
> Ed Stevens
> (Opinions expressed do not necessarily represent those of my employer.)
Received on Thu Nov 14 2002 - 09:45:12 CST
