RE: Hit Ratio fallen through the floor at 31% since a db crash ye

2001-02-09 Thread Gogala, Mladen
How about hiring a consultant? -Original Message- Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 4:41 PM To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L It had only been up for a few weeks. It could be the buffer cache. -Original Message- mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] Sent: Thursday,

RE: Hit Ratio fallen through the floor at 31% since a db crash ye

2001-02-08 Thread Barbra Hale
Title: Hit Ratio fallen through the floor at 31% since a db crash yesterday I tried that one already!! -Original Message-From: Kimberly Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 12:19 PMTo: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-LSubject: RE: Hit Ratio

RE: Hit Ratio fallen through the floor at 31% since a db crash ye

2001-02-08 Thread Brian MacLean
Title: Hit Ratio fallen through the floor at 31% since a db crash yesterday Checkforlostorinvalidindexes -Original Message-From: Barbra Hale [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 12:02 PMTo: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-LSubject: Hit Ratio fallen

RE: Hit Ratio fallen through the floor at 31% since a db crash ye

2001-02-08 Thread Jesse, Rich
Just wondering...how long was the instance up before the crash? Could it be that your buffer cache just hasn't built up to where it was before the crash? Rich Jesse System/Database Administrator [EMAIL PROTECTED] Quad/Tech International, Sussex, WI USA

RE: Hit Ratio fallen through the floor at 31% since a db crash ye

2001-02-08 Thread Gogala, Mladen
Barb, pick the slowest application and examine it for the waits. What is the application waiting for? Take a look at v$session_event (cumulative) and v$session_wait (current wait). If you see things like "scattered db file read' or 'sequential db file read', then you have a problem with access

RE: Hit Ratio fallen through the floor at 31% since a db crash ye

2001-02-08 Thread Barbra Hale
Title: RE: Hit Ratio fallen through the floor at 31% since a db crash ye It had only been up for a few weeks. It could be the buffer cache. -Original Message- From: Jesse, Rich [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 1:03 PM To: Multiple recipients of list