I have to admit that I wasn't thinking about replying
to your comment when I sent this email. However,
I think you are correct - there is an effect of extra
items not being releasable from the shared pool
when cursor_space_for_time is true. (From memory
of one of Steve's seminars, it is the Heap
I was the guy who asked that question long time ago, but I'm not sure
how exactly are sockets used. Socket is, essentially, a pipe. You must
have someone reading and someone writing it. That is not exactly what I'd
call an AST.
On 12/02/2003 01:39:28 PM, Tanel Poder wrote:
>
> > It's not being the
> It's not being the case. I would really, really like to
> know how does Oracle implement AST's?
There's no such thing you won't find from Ixora:
http://www.ixora.com.au/q+a/misc.htm
Search for AST :)
Tanel.
--
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
--
Author: Tanel
> > > The educated person is not the person
> > > > who can answer the questions, but the
> > > > person who can question the answers -- T. Schick Jr
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > One-day tutorials:
> > > > http://www.jlcomp
t ORACLE-L <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: SESSION_CACHED_CURSORS -- RE: Parse Vs Execute
>
> Mladen,
>
> I don't think it's SMON who is coalescing free memory extents. I'm not
> entirely sure here, but I think if any server process explicitly frees a
> free
t; > Three-day seminar:
> > > see http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/seminar.html
> > > UK___November
> > >
> > >
> > > The Co-operative Oracle Users' FAQ
> > > http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/faq/ind_faq.html
> > >
> > >
&g
27; FAQ
> > http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/faq/ind_faq.html
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -
> > To: "Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Sunday, November 30, 2003 1:29 PM
> >
> >
> > What
Message -
From: Hemant K Chitale
To: Multiple recipients of
list ORACLE-L
Sent: Monday, December 01, 2003 5:14 PM
Subject: Re: SESSION_CACHED_CURSORS -- RE: Parse Vs Execute
CURSOR_SPACE_FOR_TIME is FALSE.
This is an Oracle Apps R11 install.
Hemant
At
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Sent: Monday, December 01, 2003 5:14 PM
Subject: Re: SESSION_CACHED_CURSORS -- RE: Parse Vs Execute
CURSOR_SPACE_FOR_TIME is FALSE.
This is an Oracle Apps R11 install.
Hemant
At 05:29 AM 30-11-03 -0800, you wrote:
What's the value for
vember 30, 2003 1:29 PM
>
>
> What's the value for your cursor_space_for_time parameter?
>
> Tanel.
>
> - Original Message -
> From: Hemant K Chitale
> To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
> Sent: Sunday, November 30, 2003 8:54 AM
> Subj
.
- Original Message -
From:
Hemant
K Chitale
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Sent: Monday, December 01, 2003 5:14
PM
Subject: Re: SESSION_CACHED_CURSORS --
RE: Parse Vs Execute
CURSOR_SPACE_FOR_TIME is FALSE.This is an
Oracle Apps R11 install.HemantAt 05:29 AM 30
unday, November 30, 2003 8:54 AM
Subject: SESSION_CACHED_CURSORS -- RE: Parse Vs Execute
I have taken SESSION_CACHED_CURSORS from 0 to 100 to 400. On
occassion I still see
very high LIBRARY CACHE LATCH contention and am considering upping
the value again.
Currently, I set it at the Instance
for your cursor_space_for_time parameter?
Tanel.
- Original Message -
From: Hemant K Chitale
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Sent: Sunday, November 30, 2003 8:54 AM
Subject: SESSION_CACHED_CURSORS -- RE: Parse Vs Execute
I have taken SESSION_CACHED_CURSORS from 0
What's the value for your cursor_space_for_time
parameter?
Tanel.
- Original Message -
From:
Hemant
K Chitale
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Sent: Sunday, November 30, 2003 8:54
AM
Subject: SESSION_CACHED_CURSORS -- RE:
Parse Vs Execute
I have taken SESSION_CACHED_CURSORS from 0 to 100 to 400. On
occassion I still see
very high LIBRARY CACHE LATCH contention and am considering upping the
value again.
Currently, I set it at the Instance level. Since I am running
Oracle Apps, I have suggested
to the application team to put a cus
15 matches
Mail list logo
