Re: PGA_AGGREGATE_TARGET sizing of work areas and HJ cost
Date: Fri, 29 May 2009 21:24:18 +0100
"joel garry" <joel-garry_at_home.com> wrote in message news:bf6a6e67-2e3a-4f1d-801b-2d33498d2363_at_s31g2000vbp.googlegroups.com... On May 29, 10:45 am, "Jonathan Lewis" <jonat..._at_jlcomp.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> From the way the OP asks the question I don't think he had the
>> parameter hash_area_size in mind; to me it sounded like a
>> question about "how is the equivalent of the hash_area_size
>> derived when using automatic workarea sizing".
>From his reply to John, that's even less clear to me. I have no
>problem with myself or anyone misreading any of this, I think it is a
>good thing that people are willing to fill in the blanks.
You're right - my interpretation was wrong. Apologies for muddying the waters.
-- Regards Jonathan Lewis http://jonathanlewis.wordpress.com Author: Cost Based Oracle: Fundamentals http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/cbo_book/ind_book.html The Co-operative Oracle Users' FAQ http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/faq/ind_faq.htmlReceived on Fri May 29 2009 - 15:24:18 CDT