Re: CR Block copies, always 6 in 10.2.0.3?
- From: "조동욱" <ukja.dion@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: anjo.kolk@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 17:24:40 +0900
But occasionally you will see a larger number of CR copies. For example
when
there is 60 processes updating a table with a NL operation (SAP, for
example). One of the tests as I remember is that the buffer is not busy ('is
not pinned'), then it will check the number of CR copies. If a CR copy is
pinned it is not counted. So that is probably why you can speak of a soft
limit.
Very impressive information.
If this is the case, we won't have any buffer lock contention for consistent
read
unless physical read is involved.
This means that _db_block_max_cr_dba itself won't make any session wait or
locked.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: CR Block copies, always 6 in 10.2.0.3?
- From: kyle Hailey
- References:
- Re: CR Block copies, always 6 in 10.2.0.3?
- From: K Gopalakrishnan
- Re: CR Block copies, always 6 in 10.2.0.3?
- From: Anjo Kolk
Other related posts:
- » CR Block copies, always 6 in 10.2.0.3?
- » Re: CR Block copies, always 6 in 10.2.0.3?
- » Re: CR Block copies, always 6 in 10.2.0.3?
- » Re: CR Block copies, always 6 in 10.2.0.3?
- » Re: CR Block copies, always 6 in 10.2.0.3?
- » Re: CR Block copies, always 6 in 10.2.0.3?
- » Re: CR Block copies, always 6 in 10.2.0.3?
- » Re: CR Block copies, always 6 in 10.2.0.3?
- » Re: CR Block copies, always 6 in 10.2.0.3?
- » Re: CR Block copies, always 6 in 10.2.0.3?
- » Re: CR Block copies, always 6 in 10.2.0.3?
- » Re: CR Block copies, always 6 in 10.2.0.3?
- » Re: CR Block copies, always 6 in 10.2.0.3?
- » Re: CR Block copies, always 6 in 10.2.0.3?
- Re: CR Block copies, always 6 in 10.2.0.3?
- From: kyle Hailey
- Re: CR Block copies, always 6 in 10.2.0.3?
- From: K Gopalakrishnan
- Re: CR Block copies, always 6 in 10.2.0.3?
- From: Anjo Kolk