Re: tracking down hidden SQL???

From: Adric Norris <landstander668_at_gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2013 15:33:45 -0500
Message-ID: <CAJueESrvUhYGnm9b73ws9vePmO7QkyES3+G5FXQ6KuFUqJ9jUQ_at_mail.gmail.com>



That wouldn't surprise me at all, actually. Rather annoying that it's not visible, however.

On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 2:42 PM, Jonathan Lewis <jonathan_at_jlcomp.demon.co.uk
> wrote:

>
> Just throwing in a wild guess here - Dan't suggestion is the smart thing
> to do - but if the prev_sql_id is always for "select silly_thing from dual"
> which you're sure is just a connection pool test then it's possible that
> the invisible statement is just a "rollback" (or "rollback;" or "Rollback"
> or ... ).
>
> Regards
> Jonathan Lewis
>
>
> ________________________________________
> From: oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org [oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org] on
> behalf of Adric Norris [landstander668_at_gmail.com]
> Sent: 16 October 2013 20:15
> To: Chris Taylor
> Cc: oracle-l
> Subject: Re: tracking down hidden SQL???
>
> On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 2:05 PM, Chris Taylor <
> christopherdtaylor1994_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> > Did you try querying [g]v$session PREV_SQL_ID as well for those sessions
> > that are showing the SQL_ID you're interested in? (Kerry mentioned it in
> > that blog post). The prev_sql_id might give you a clue about why this
> > sql_id is showing up as the current one?
> >
>
> The previous PREV_SQL_ID is always identical, but is unfortunately just a
> connection pool session-test query.
>
> select 2+2 from dual
>
> I appreciate the suggestion!
>
>
> --
> http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l--
> http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
>
>
>

-- 
"I'm too sexy for my code." -Awk Sed Fred


--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Received on Wed Oct 16 2013 - 22:33:45 CEST

Original text of this message