Re: row cache objects latch and shared_pool_size

By not looking at one statistic in isolation, but by setting it in the context of other statistics.

For example, if your shared pool really was too large, I would expect to see very, very few reloads-to-pins -because a reload is what you get when the library cache is too small, and cursors have to be aged out. With a large shared pool, you won't be ageing too many things out, so the reloads to pins should be very good (ie, much, much smaller than 1%). So check v$librarycache.

A good gethitratio might also indicate the shared pool was too large, in the context of contention for your latch, because too small a shared pool would cause lots of get misses.

If you don't have ORA-4031's, that's another indication that it's not too small.

And so on... that's just a flavour of what you look for. If all other indicators are reasonably healthy, in other words, then it is likely a matter of too big a cache rather than too small.

Regards
HJR "NetComrade" <andreyNSPAM_at_bookexchange.net> wrote in message news:3e89cf77.3113443725_at_nyc.news.speakeasy.net...
> Row cache objects latch:
> ........................
>
> In order to reduce contention for this latch, we need to
> tune the data dictionary cache. In Oracle7 this basically
> means
> increasing the size of the shared pool (SHARED_POOL_SIZE)
>
>
> Could it be the other way around? Could the shared_pool_size be too
> large? how can one tell?
> .......
> We use Oracle 8.1.7.4 on Solaris 2.7 boxes
> remove NSPAM to email
Received on Tue Apr 01 2003 - 14:12:11 CST