Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid
HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US
 

Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.server -> Re: Resize shared_pool / Avoid Ora-4030

Re: Resize shared_pool / Avoid Ora-4030

From: Jonathan Lewis <jonathan_at_jlcomp.demon.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 13:19:34 -0000
Message-ID: <bu641e$d64$2$830fa79f@news.demon.co.uk>

Error 4030 is not about shared pool memory, it's about processes being unable to acquire memory from the o/s for their local workspace.

It's 4032 that is about problems with the shared pool.

The 9i commands to resize the SGA are all likely to have a nasty overhead on big, busy systems when you try to resize downwards - the memory has to be cleared a granule at a time, so Oracle has to work hard at kicking objects out of memory, which means creating all sorts of exlusive locks and pins and doing lots of invalidations. Your 1 CPU for 1 hour seems excessive, though - but it wouldn't surprise me if this area weren't so sensitive to latch issues that you've found a bug.

As an experiment, you might try reducing the memory in steps of 16MB (which is one granule for larger unix systems) to see if this helped.

-- 
Regards

Jonathan Lewis
http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk

  The educated person is not the person
  who can answer the questions, but the
  person who can question the answers -- T. Schick Jr


Next public appearance2:
 March 2004 Hotsos Symposium - Keynote
 March 2004 Charlotte NC - OUG Tutorial
 April 2004 Iceland


One-day tutorials:
http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/tutorial.html


Three-day seminar:
see http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/seminar.html
____UK___February


The Co-operative Oracle Users' FAQ
http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/faq/ind_faq.html


"Stephan Bressler" <sbresslerx_no_spam_at_arcor.de> wrote in message
news:bu5o32$rbt$1_at_news.mch.sbs.de...

> Hi NG,
>
> I'm thinking about avoiding ora-4030 errors due to many, many unique big
> statements using the memory resizing feature of oracle 9i. Flushing the
> shared pool usually is of no help.
>
> Therefor I suggest the following procedure:
> 1. configure shared_pool_size initially to e.g. 300M
> 2. each night (or any other low-load-period),
> resize s`hared_pool_size to 100M
> 3. immediately after that, resize to 300M
>
> This would give a 200M totally free, unfragmented shared_pool.
>
> In theory! In praxis the "alter system set shared_pool_size=100M" lasts
> for 1 hour and is still running. CKPT eats up 1 CPU.
> I'm running 9.2.0.3 on Linux.
>
> Any ideas / suggestions?
>
> Stephan
>
Received on Thu Jan 15 2004 - 07:19:34 CST

Original text of this message

HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US