Re: table with keep as buffer pool see much more physical reads than the number of blocks in the table

["Jonathan Lewis" <jonathan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I think Mark's comments are probably in the right area.
If you update the table in one session, then other sessions
are going to start creating read-consistent clones.  Do you
have a recycle pool ? If not, then the clones will end up in 
the Keep pool.
It's possible that if you generate too many clones of blocks
1 to 100 (say) then the "originals" of some other blocks have
to be kicked out of memory to make way for them - and then
get read back later.

You could check with a query like:

select    file#, block#, count(*) 
from    v$bh 
where    objd = {data object id of table}
group by
        file#, block#
having 
       count(*) > 1
/

to see how many copies there are of each block.

Or possibly:
select  
ct, count(*)
from
(
select file#, block#, count(*)  ct
from v$bh 
where objd = {data object id of table}
group by
 file#, block#
)
group by ct
/

To get a complete distribution pattern of how heavily
cloned the blocks are.

The queries might be a little brutal on your buffer cache
for several seconds, though.


Regards

Jonathan Lewis
http://jonathanlewis.wordpress.com

Author: Cost Based Oracle: Fundamentals
http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/cbo_book/ind_book.html

The Co-operative Oracle Users' FAQ
http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/faq/ind_faq.html


---- Original Message ----- -

> a.       block cleanouts could cause some blocks to be updated (I think
> that would be a worst case of doubling.)
--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l

Other related posts:

table with keep as buffer pool see much more physical reads than the number of blocks in the table

Re: table with keep as buffer pool see much more physical reads than the number of blocks in the table

Re: table with keep as buffer pool see much more physical reads than the number of blocks in the table

Re: table with keep as buffer pool see much more physical reads than the number of blocks in the table

Re: table with keep as buffer pool see much more physical reads than the number of blocks in the table