Re: Solaris 10/Oracle 9 memory problems - but I can't see why ...
From: Michael Austin <maustin_at_firstdbasource.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 19:23:40 -0500
Message-ID: <jAOHl.30700$ZP4.10730_at_nlpi067.nbdc.sbc.com>
joel garry wrote:
>> On Apr 20, 3:26 pm, Neil Cudd <neil.c..._at_blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> Hello,
>>> Solaris sparc 5.10 running Oracle 9.2.0.764 bit EE.
>>> The server has 2Gb physical memory.
>>> The (offshore) unix monitors are telling me the server is running out
>>> of memory. They won't tell me anything else. I guess they think that'd
>>> take the fun out of it.
>>> There is one oracle instance with a total sga of 380Mb
>>> There isn't anything else running (other than BMC Patrol and a Java
>>> process).
>>> My unix skills are shaky, but prstat gives the following (editied for
>>> highlights) :
>>> PID USERNAME SIZE RSS STATE PRI NICE TIME CPU PROCESS/
>>> NLWP
>>> 1104 patrol 42M 36M cpu0 0 10 3:19:43 1.1% PatrolAgent/
>>> 1
>>> 3035 oracle 456M 437M sleep 59 0 0:02:39 0.0% oracle/12
>>> 3098 patrol 450M 444M sleep 59 0 0:11:19 0.0% oracle/1
>>> 3097 patrol 18M 10M sleep 59 0 0:04:27 0.0% sqlplus/1
>>> 3047 oracle 456M 438M sleep 59 0 0:00:02 0.0% oracle/11
>>> 3037 oracle 452M 434M sleep 59 0 0:02:08 0.0% oracle/12
>>> 3031 oracle 450M 429M sleep 59 0 0:01:44 0.0% oracle/1
>>> 3043 oracle 449M 433M sleep 59 0 0:00:39 0.0% oracle/1
>>> 3045 oracle 449M 437M sleep 59 0 0:00:37 0.0% oracle/1
>>> A couple of questions :
>>> Is this output saying that each of those oracle processes has 400+Mb
>>> memory allocated to it (can't be surely..)
>>> Is there anything anyone can suggest to identify just what is eating
>>> all the memory ?
>>> Many thanks for any advice,
>>> Neil
>> DBAs should avoid tampering with UNIX.
>>
>> Danny.
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 19:23:40 -0500
Message-ID: <jAOHl.30700$ZP4.10730_at_nlpi067.nbdc.sbc.com>
joel garry wrote:
> On Apr 22, 5:45 am, "fightpho..._at_googlemail.com" > <fightpho..._at_googlemail.com> wrote:
>> On Apr 20, 3:26 pm, Neil Cudd <neil.c..._at_blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> Hello,
>>> Solaris sparc 5.10 running Oracle 9.2.0.764 bit EE.
>>> The server has 2Gb physical memory.
>>> The (offshore) unix monitors are telling me the server is running out
>>> of memory. They won't tell me anything else. I guess they think that'd
>>> take the fun out of it.
>>> There is one oracle instance with a total sga of 380Mb
>>> There isn't anything else running (other than BMC Patrol and a Java
>>> process).
>>> My unix skills are shaky, but prstat gives the following (editied for
>>> highlights) :
>>> PID USERNAME SIZE RSS STATE PRI NICE TIME CPU PROCESS/
>>> NLWP
>>> 1104 patrol 42M 36M cpu0 0 10 3:19:43 1.1% PatrolAgent/
>>> 1
>>> 3035 oracle 456M 437M sleep 59 0 0:02:39 0.0% oracle/12
>>> 3098 patrol 450M 444M sleep 59 0 0:11:19 0.0% oracle/1
>>> 3097 patrol 18M 10M sleep 59 0 0:04:27 0.0% sqlplus/1
>>> 3047 oracle 456M 438M sleep 59 0 0:00:02 0.0% oracle/11
>>> 3037 oracle 452M 434M sleep 59 0 0:02:08 0.0% oracle/12
>>> 3031 oracle 450M 429M sleep 59 0 0:01:44 0.0% oracle/1
>>> 3043 oracle 449M 433M sleep 59 0 0:00:39 0.0% oracle/1
>>> 3045 oracle 449M 437M sleep 59 0 0:00:37 0.0% oracle/1
>>> A couple of questions :
>>> Is this output saying that each of those oracle processes has 400+Mb
>>> memory allocated to it (can't be surely..)
>>> Is there anything anyone can suggest to identify just what is eating
>>> all the memory ?
>>> Many thanks for any advice,
>>> Neil
>> DBAs should avoid tampering with UNIX.
>>
>> Danny.
> > Why? http://www.pythian.com/news/229/doing-something-about-the-sysadminday-dba-snub > > jg > -- > _at_home.com is bogus. > My usenet .sig 15 years ago: > "See your System Administrator?" I *AM* the #%_at_!?& System > Administrator!
Joel, Obviously that went over very well - after posting the 8th comment, I noticed the last post was 2006... and the www.dbaday.com website still says:
ORA-24123 feature "dbaday" is not yet implemented
24123, 00000, "feature %s is not yet implemented" // *Cause: An attempt was made to use the specified feature, but the feature is
// not yet implemented. // *Action: Do not attempt to use the feature. //Received on Wed Apr 22 2009 - 19:23:40 CDT