Re: CPU time missing from 10046 trace of cached table

On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 11:56:59 -0700, bdurrettccci_at_yahoo.com wrote:

>Looks like 10046 traces don't correctly report the CPU usage of full
>scans of cached tables.

I don't see a 10046 trace, ie RAW data, so what is your issue? You didn't post this for a second time because my response didn't suit you, did you?
You don't provide any details: not on how busy the database is, not how busy the server is, you just complain that the wall clock ticks faster than the CPU!
What a big surprise.
Come up with *evidence* instead of unfounded 'claims' and 'myths'.

-- 
Sybrand Bakker
Senior Oracle DBA