Re: Surprising Performance Changes with Oracle 220.127.116.11 (Long Post)
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2009 02:20:49 -0700 (PDT)
On 10 sep, 10:26, Mladen Gogala wrote:
> Question: was direct I/O enabled here? If not, the blocks may have been
> in the system buffer cache in which case oracle would still report them
> as "physical reads" but blocks would be coming from memory instead.
Why do you ask this? Charles clearly states that it was not. Will you believe him next time?? Received on Thu Sep 10 2009 - 04:20:49 CDT