Re: Cache a table

Anurag Varma wrote:

>
> If a table is frequently scanned (i.e. very hot), it is going to remain in
> the buffer pool no matter what. Its no good use putting it in the KEEP
> pool.

Disagree. The issue is not whether it would tend to want to stay in the buffer cache or not, but whether it is at risk of being dislodged by a rogue, huge, tablescan. By putting even a frequently-accessed table into the keep pool, you ensure it can't be dislodged by scans against large tables (assuming you haven't been daft enough to ask for them to go into the keep pool as well, of course!!).

Such cache 'partitioning' has got to be a good thing in its own right.

Regards
HJR

-- 
--------------------------------------------
See my brand new website, soon to be full of 
new articles: www.dizwell.com.
Nothing much there yet, but give it time!!
--------------------------------------------