Re: SGA & shared pool size
- From: Greg Rahn <greg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: LS Cheng <exriscer@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2010 14:55:20 -0700
So I take it you are not using PX on this database (doesn't seem that
big if you have just 6GB PGA) -- you are running stuff serial and
relying on the buffer cache for read performance?
Given a large enough database and system with enough disk/channel
bandwidth it may make more sense to make large dimensions PARALLEL.
On Sat, Apr 17, 2010 at 4:59 AM, LS Cheng <exriscer@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I have 6GB PGA set. Before I check the system it was 3GB and had some
> sorting contention but with 6GB I barely observe large value for multipass
> system statistics, most is memory and some one pass.
>
> The large shared pool is because the problems I have observed, probably a
> RAC bug.
>
> The large buffer cache is for the dimension tables, some of them has million
> of rows and ncreasing :-S
--
Regards,
Greg Rahn
http://structureddata.org
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Other related posts:
