where did you hear that oracle 10g was written almost entirely outside the
US?
what critical problems have you had with 9i?
- Original Message -
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, January 23, 2004 10:19 PM
On 01/23/2004 07:54:25 PM, Arnold, Sandra
Personal communication.
On 01/24/2004 06:44:24 AM, Ryan wrote:
where did you hear that oracle 10g was written almost entirely
outside
the
US?
what critical problems have you had with 9i?
- Original Message -
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday,
what are the specs of that box? what does it cost? Ive never worked on
something that big. how big is the database your working on?
- Original Message -
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2004 11:24 PM
So, my intention to set P_A_T to
I read the paper about the adaptive memory and how it
gets wasted, but with 10G SGA you can afford to be a bit
wasteful. I would set workarea_size_policy to manual and
then set sort_area_size to 32M and hash area size to 128M.
With the memory sizes you mentioned, there shouldn't be any
problems.
Kirti,
So is April 12th the latest date you heard for when 10g might be
released?? Because it was the end of 2003, but I didn't know it had
slipped all the way into April...
-Original Message-
Kirtikumar Deshpande
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2004 7:24 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list
: pga_aggregate_target and a memory leak
I am interested in the bug number. Currently am having memory problems that
may be related to the pga.
Sandra
-Original Message-
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2004 5:09 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Yes I have and still have a problem with pga
EST
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: pga_aggregate_target and a memory leak
Kirti,
So is April 12th the latest date you heard for when 10g might be
released?? Because it was the end of 2003, but I didn't know it had
slipped all the way into April
]
Date: 2004/01/23 Fri PM 03:24:45 EST
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: pga_aggregate_target and a memory leak
Kirti,
So is April 12th the latest date you heard for when 10g might be
released?? Because it was the end of 2003, but I didn't know it had
On 01/23/2004 07:54:25 PM, Arnold, Sandra wrote:
We still have an 8.1.5 database as well as two 8.1.7.4 and one 9.2.04
databases. We are planning on upgrading our 8i databases this year.
The
rate we are going it probably will be two years before we get to 10g.
Sandra
That would be a very
load has
hit it.
Paul
this was on w2k server sp3, 9.2.0.4 std ed
From: Kirtikumar Deshpande
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2004/01/21 Wed PM 02:44:31 EST
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: pga_aggregate_target and a memory
leak
Paul,
Most of my work is on HP-UX and AIX.
I have yet to see any ORA-600 and memory leaks related to P_A_T. All databases that I
work with
are on 9.2.0.4, except just one running on 9.2.0.3. No memory leak there either.
- Kirti
--- Paul Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- Kirtikumar
]
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
01/21/2004 06:09 AM
Please respond to ORACLE-L
To: Multiple recipients of list
ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject:Re:
pga_aggregate_target and a memory leak
Setting P_A_T
: Kirtikumar Deshpande
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2004/01/21 Wed PM 02:44:31 EST
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: pga_aggregate_target and a memory
leak
Replies in line...
- Kirti
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Kirti
: pga_aggregate_target and a memory
leak
Replies in line...
- Kirti
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Kirti, you're back!
Thanks. Found some slack time from routine DBA
work!
Must have finished the book. :)
Not yet.. Its tough..
Re the PGA
-
Van: Ryan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Verzonden: donderdag 22 januari 2004 11:05
Aan: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Onderwerp: Re: Re: pga_aggregate_target and a memory leak
Im not sure I see what the size of the PAT has to do with a memory leak. On
metalink there is a laundry list
: Kirtikumar Deshpande
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2004/01/21 Wed PM 02:44:31 EST
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: pga_aggregate_target and a memory
leak
Replies in line...
- Kirti
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Kirti
2004 11:05
Aan: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Onderwerp: Re: Re: pga_aggregate_target and a memory leak
Im not sure I see what the size of the PAT has to do with a memory leak. On
metalink there is a laundry list of PGA things that were supposedly causing
memory leaks prior to 9.2.0.4. Are you
So, my intention to set P_A_T to 140G on a new datawarehouse is ill-advised?
I'm not kidding, by the way. The Sun E15K belonging to the project I'm
currently working on (purportedly) has 160G of RAM. It is still in the box,
so I'm not believing anything until I type prtconf...
I wasn't
it.
Paul
this was on w2k server sp3, 9.2.0.4 std ed
From: Kirtikumar Deshpande
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2004/01/21 Wed PM 02:44:31 EST
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: pga_aggregate_target and a memory
leak
Replies in line
Setting P_A_T to a 1GB limit with over 2GB of *available memory* on AIX 4.3.3 and
9.2.0.4 caused
ORA-4030, till we turned off hash joins. OS level resources (ulimit -a) were all set to
'unlimited'. In a very limited testing, setting P_A_T to less than S_A_S (and S_A_R_S)
worked,
however, the
ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject:Re: pga_aggregate_target and a memory leak
Setting P_A_T to a 1GB limit with over 2GB of *available memory* on AIX 4.3.3 and 9.2.0.4 caused
ORA-4030, till we turned off hash joins. OS level resources (ulimit -a) were all set to
'unlimited
:
Subject:Re: pga_aggregate_target and a memory leak
Setting P_A_T to a 1GB limit with over 2GB of *available memory* on AIX
4.3.3 and 9.2.0.4 caused
ORA-4030, till we turned off hash joins. OS level resources (ulimit -a)
were all set to
'unlimited'. In a very limited testing, setting
kirti-- would you recommend avoiding pga_aggregate_target for now?
From: Kirtikumar Deshpande [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2004/01/21 Wed PM 02:44:31 EST
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: pga_aggregate_target and a memory leak
Replies in line
:44:31 EST
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: pga_aggregate_target and a memory leak
Replies in line...
- Kirti
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Kirti, you're back!
Thanks. Found some slack time from routine DBA work!
Must
A comment I picked up from Tom Kyte's
Masterclass in Copenhagen last week was
that there is an effective limit of 1GB to
P_A_T - and although a single session is
supposed to be allowed 5% of the P_A_T,
you could get about 90MB. So there are
some funny things going on in that area
which still
Im assuming its his wait interface book. Ill get it as soon as it comes out.
Hopefully it will be as good as his other tuning book. Is the April 12th
date firm? Now the bigger question: Will it be out before the 10G database?
Thanks, Ryan.
Yes, it is on OWI, for those who are new to OWI. Covers OWI from 8i to 10g.
Co-authored with
Richmond Shee and K.Gopalakrishnan.
It will not be out till 10g goes production. Unfortunately, April 12th is not firm.
10g changes
Regards,
- Kirti
--- Ryan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
: pga_aggregate_target and a memory
leak
Replies in line...
- Kirti
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Kirti, you're back!
Thanks. Found some slack time from routine DBA
work!
Must have finished the book. :)
Not yet.. Its tough..
Re the PGA problems, what
One of our production DBAs does not want to use pga_aggregate_target on a 9.2.0.3
instance due to a possible memory leak. The only note on memory leaks and
pga_aggregate_target I can find on metalink is: 334427.995
doesnt seem to apply to pga_aggregate_target. We are on sun solaris. Dont know
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One of our production DBAs does not want to use pga_aggregate_target on a 9.2.0.3
instance due to a possible memory leak. The only note on memory leaks and
pga_aggregate_target I can find on metalink is: 334427.995
doesnt seem to apply to pga_aggregate_target. We
For further testing but will try do do so and report some more.
Regards,
Jeroen
-Oorspronkelijk bericht-
Van: Stephane Faroult [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Verzonden: dinsdag 20 januari 2004 20:59
Aan: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Onderwerp: Re: pga_aggregate_target and a memory leak
31 matches
Mail list logo