Re: Performance impact of inactive sessions

sybrandb wrote:
> On Jan 19, 10:00 am, "Jack" <n..._at_INVALIDmail.com> wrote:
> > Shortly: Nope
> >
> > "Martin T." <bilbothebagginsb..._at_freenet.de> wrote in messagenews:1169195643.040984.149850_at_v45g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
> >
> >
> >
> > > Greetings!
> >
> > > Please bear with me if I'm being somewhat unspecific here, but I yet
> > > don't know enough to get more specific:
> >
> > > I will make it short for this initial question: Would you expect a
> > > problematic performance impact on a Oracle 9i2 database by lots (say 30
> > > on a decent modern workstation PC) of INACTIVE sessions versus a system
> > > where the number of active processing (say 4-5 active sessions) is the
> > > same without these inactive sessions?
> >
> > > thank you,
> > > br,
> > > Martin- Hide quoted text -- Show quoted text -
>
>
> Disagree.
> Inactive sessions don't release their memory.
>
> --
> Sybrand Bakker
> Senior Oracle DBA

True, but they also don't consume any CPU or I/O. The only way I could see an inactive session impacting performance would be if the memory consumption forced additional OS paging. And even at that, once the memory for the inactive session is paged out, it should pretty much be out of the picture until such time as it 'goes active' and has to be paged in.

I guess it comes back to .. if you have a performance issue, identify the actual bottleneck and address the issue. Received on Fri Jan 19 2007 - 08:14:16 CST