Hi, Given your server, I assume that your IO is fast enough for these parallel loads as well? If you have logging on and lousy IO for redologs, then this might be a reason why parallel jobs get even slower. Although such drastic performance drop probably isn't due logging bottleneck. So I guess the logical next step is to run your parallel sqlldr sessions again and check from v$session_event (and v$sesstat) where most of the time is going. If it doesn't ring a bell, then you could also run the normal sqlldr job and check whether there's a difference in proportions of time spent. Also you could use sql trace with waits for getting this information, but I think in this particular case identifying the session id's and using v$session_event would be easier. Tanel. > I am running Oracle 10g on an IBM P690 with AIX. For a particular job I > load 8GB using sqlldr, direct=yes in two hours. I wanted to speed this > up, so I broke the job up into four jobs, each loading 2GB each with the > parallel=true option turned on. These four jobs now take six hours > each. Why is there a time increase? > > > > I can't find a parameter that will solve the apparent contention that is > going on. > > > > Any ideas where I may be going wrong? > > > > Thanks ... Roger -- //www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l