Re: Oracle function myth on Solaris machinie

joel-garry_at_home.com (Joel Garry) wrote in message news:<91884734.0311211705.1c47309b_at_posting.google.com>...
> Sybrand Bakker <gooiditweg_at_sybrandb.nospam.demon.nl> wrote in message news:<00psrvgs8c8vilkp2tilu5u5joqoo25fkr_at_4ax.com>...
> > On 21 Nov 2003 07:44:49 -0800, guo_at_andrews.edu (Limin Guo) wrote:
> >
> > > WHY sql_trace or 10046 has impact on the insert, I
> > >don't understand.
> >
> > Are you familiar with the buffer cache? If so, won't you think a
> > likely explanation is in your so-called 'fast-mode' everything is in
> > the buffer cache and in your so-called 'slow-mode' Oracle has to fetch
> > everything again?
> > So why are you making up myths?
>
> So why was it slow on the third try?
>
> Maybe he needs to go to 8.1.7.4 to fix one of the performance bugs?
>
> jg

I wouldn't think it was caused by buffer cache. just as common sense, I don't believe the buffer cache has this much impact on the insert statement (2 hours and 15 minutes vs. 10 minutes). Like Joel said it could be a performance bug. I am going to ask Unix group to reboot the machine soon. if problem is still around, I will try to rebuild this database. somehow, I kind of suspect the database was corrupted. If all fails, I will try to apply 8.1.7.4 patchset. Any other suggestions?

We used kill -9 a lot for last two weeks to kill running away report queries (I know it is bad practice to kill the process this way). I would not think this should have any permanent impact on my database. Has anyone have bad experience with kill -9 on Unix platform?

Thanks Joel and Sybrand for your helps. Received on Mon Nov 24 2003 - 08:02:29 CST