Helmut,
Seems a bit high to me as well. Concerning the PGA issue, what about running
something like :
col name format A25
select n.name,
round(min(s.value) / 1024) "MIN K",
round(avg(s.value) / 1024) "AVG K",
round(max(s.value) / 1024) "MAX K"
from v$statname n,
v$sesstat s
where n.name like 'session pga memory%'
and n.statistic# = s.statistic#
group by n.name
/
IMHO, the Oracle "insider view" will probably give you something more realistic.
Now, concerning what HP-UX reports to you, I would certainly suspect the run-time
linker. I guess that there are better specialists of HP-UX than myself (anybody
qualifies :-)) on this list who know how to tell which dynamically loaded libraries
are used by a currently running program ?
HTH,
SF
>----- ------- Original Message ------- -----
>From: "Daiminger, Helmut" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Sent: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 03:59:26
>
>Hi Stephane,
>
>thanks for your reply.
>
>We are measuring the values by getting the OS
>process ID of a specific
>Oracle connection and then trach that process ID
>using glance (on HP-UX).
>
>Since the SGA is ab 1.5 GB, it is definitely not
>attached to the memory
>consumed by each process. I know that this is an
>issue on Solaris.
>
>We tried and used a whole bunch of different
>processes and they were all
>using 20-25 MB of RAM (doing nothing). This number
>seems just a little bit
>high to me...
>
>Example: If I have an SGA with 1 GB, 200 MB of
>pga-aggregate-target and 200
>users connecting to the datbase (although only
>about 10% of them are active
>at the same point in time).
>This would mean that my memory consumption is: 1 GB
>+ 200 MB + 200*25 MB =
>6.2 GB...
>
>
>Regards,
>Helmut
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>Sent: Monday, November 17, 2003 10:30 AM
>To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
>
>
>Helmut,
>
> I don't know how you are measuring your numbers,
>but beware that what the
>operating system reports is often somewhat
>misleading. Typically, shared
>memory is often 'attributed' to each and every
>process linked to it. When
>you think about it it makes sense, but at the same
>time it does mean that n
>processes will really use much less than n * the
>amount of memory reported
>as used by one process. This is true both of the
>'program' part of user
>memory (shared libraries) and of the 'data' part of
>it (SGA). When your
>process connects, it attaches the SGA and some
>shared libraries, and more
>shared libraries come into play as it starts doing
>something. You may have a
>better view of what is really used by your process
>by checking into
>V$SESSTAT, which holds a number of values about it.
>
>
>HTH,
>
>SF
>
>>----- ------- Original Message ------- -----
>>From: "Daiminger, Helmut"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>Sent: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 23:09:26
>>
>>Hi,
>>
>>we are running 9.2 on HP-UX here.
>>
>>We have pg_aggregate_target configured, but I
>>realized (in my opinion) very
>>high memory consumption of Oracle Unix processes.
>>
>>a) How come that one Oracle Connection (i.e.
>>dedicated Unix process on HP)
>>is using up at least 22 MB of RAM? It is using 22
>>MB if the user is just
>>connected, not doing anything.
>>
>>Any way I can modify this?
>>
>>b) If the user is querying data and the like, the
>>memory consumption goes up
>>to 60 MB. How come?
>>
>>Thanks!
>>
>>Regards,
>>Helmut
>>
--
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
--
Author: Stephane Faroult
INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fat City Network Services -- 858-538-5051 http://www.fatcity.com
San Diego, California -- Mailing list and web hosting services
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message
to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in
the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L
(or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may
also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).
