Re: Oracle Shared Server Implementation

There are valid uses for it still... If you've got such a vast number of
sessions that you're running out of memory, and you can't upgrade your iron.


You have to be aware that there might be potential performance impacts vs
dedicated servers, as well as hitting the occasional odd bug because you're
using a "non-mainstream setup" (we've hit a rather nasty one with the
dispatchers for instance).

But particularly if a large chunk of your sessions are not concurrently
active, but idle some of the time, you can really reduce the memory
footprint of the private process memory on your system.

Again, it's not something I'd ever setup out of the box (unless maybe you've
got so many sessions that no box out there can handle it with ded. servers),
but it's something that can help you (at least temporarily) resolve memory
issues.

Stefan


=========================

Stefan P Knecht
CEO & Founder
s@xxxxxxxx

10046 Consulting GmbH
Schwarzackerstrasse 29
CH-8304 Wallisellen
Switzerland

Phone +41-(0)8400-10046
Cell +41 (0) 79 571 36 27
info@xxxxxxxx
http://www.10046.ch

=========================


On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 2:22 PM, Jeffrey Beckstrom <JBECKSTROM@xxxxxxxxx>wrote:

>  When we were on 32-bit hardware, for one of our databases we had to
> implement shared servers due to hitting the 32-bit memory limit.  Since that
> time, we have migrated all of our systems to 64-bit hardware.  My question
> is, on 64-bit hardware is there ever a need for shared servers?
>
>
> Jeffrey Beckstrom
> Database Administrator
> Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority
> Information Systems
> 1240 W. 6th Street
> Cleveland, Ohio 44113
>

Other related posts: