"Sybrand Bakker" <gooiditweg_at_sybrandb.demon.nl> wrote in message
news:cigvsvkmb44gl0l6shs5js2b0l6ml0fqti_at_4ax.com...
| On Thu, 4 Dec 2003 22:14:29 -0000, "Keith Jamieson"
| <keith_jamieson_at_hotmail.com> wrote:
|
| Tables don't disappear on the fly, unless you have a very whacky
| environment. Checking for existence should be redundant and been dealt
| with by exception handling. Misusing the datadictionary over and over
| again, to check something what doesn't need to be checked will have a
| noticeable impact on your application as the dictionary cache will
| grow and trim your shared pool. Your shared pool however will grow
| because you are using dynamic sql everywhere. Your application will be
| unscalable. Now would you really like the end-user to experience how
| an unscalable application works? Need I say more?
|
|
| --
| Sybrand Bakker, Senior Oracle DBA
we agree on avoiding the unnecessary dictionary checks -- but why would the
dictionary cache would grow? oracle's got to check the same stuff anyway
once the SQL is actually parsed. are you thinking that the frequency of
checking will grow the cache?
Received on Thu Dec 04 2003 - 19:48:11 CST
