Re: db block size
- From: "Jonathan Lewis" <jonathan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2004 08:54:14 +0100
For dereference, here are the 30 parameters
that change their default values when you switch
between o_f_e=8.1.7 and o_f_e = 9.2.0 (on the
platform I happened to be using).
You might want to try setting o_f_e to 9.2.0 then
setting all of these to the 8.1.7 values and selectively
re-enabling the 9.2.0 value.
In passing, I haven't checked whether the values
for o_f_e = 8.1.7 match the default values for
a real 8.1.7 instance - any bets, anyone ?
(I don't think the last parameter changes makes
much difference, by the way).
V NAME VALUE
IS_DEF
- ------------------------------------ -------------------------------------
--- ---------
8 _always_anti_join OFF
TRUE
9 _always_anti_join CHOOSE
TRUE
8 _always_semi_join OFF
TRUE
9 _always_semi_join CHOOSE
TRUE
8 _b_tree_bitmap_plans FALSE
TRUE
9 _b_tree_bitmap_plans TRUE
TRUE
8 _complex_view_merging FALSE
TRUE
9 _complex_view_merging TRUE
TRUE
8 _cpu_to_io 100
TRUE
9 _cpu_to_io 0
TRUE
8 _generalized_pruning_enabled FALSE
TRUE
9 _generalized_pruning_enabled TRUE
TRUE
8 _gs_anti_semi_join_allowed FALSE
TRUE
9 _gs_anti_semi_join_allowed TRUE
TRUE
8 _index_join_enabled FALSE
TRUE
9 _index_join_enabled TRUE
TRUE
8 _load_without_compile none
TRUE
9 _load_without_compile NONE
TRUE
8 _new_initial_join_orders FALSE
TRUE
9 _new_initial_join_orders TRUE
TRUE
8 _new_sort_cost_estimate FALSE
TRUE
9 _new_sort_cost_estimate TRUE
TRUE
8 _optim_adjust_for_part_skews FALSE
TRUE
9 _optim_adjust_for_part_skews TRUE
TRUE
8 _optim_new_default_join_sel FALSE
TRUE
9 _optim_new_default_join_sel TRUE
TRUE
8 _optim_peek_user_binds FALSE
TRUE
9 _optim_peek_user_binds TRUE
TRUE
8 _optimizer_cost_model IO
TRUE
9 _optimizer_cost_model CHOOSE
TRUE
8 _optimizer_new_join_card_computation FALSE
TRUE
9 _optimizer_new_join_card_computation TRUE
TRUE
8 _optimizer_system_stats_usage 1
TRUE
9 _optimizer_system_stats_usage 0
TRUE
8 _optimizer_undo_cost_change 8.1.7
TRUE
9 _optimizer_undo_cost_change 9.2.0
TRUE
8 _ordered_nested_loop FALSE
TRUE
9 _ordered_nested_loop TRUE
TRUE
8 _parallel_broadcast_enabled FALSE
TRUE
9 _parallel_broadcast_enabled TRUE
TRUE
8 _pre_rewrite_push_pred FALSE
TRUE
9 _pre_rewrite_push_pred TRUE
TRUE
8 _pred_move_around FALSE
TRUE
9 _pred_move_around TRUE
TRUE
8 _push_join_predicate FALSE
TRUE
9 _push_join_predicate TRUE
TRUE
8 _push_join_union_view FALSE
TRUE
9 _push_join_union_view TRUE
TRUE
8 _table_scan_cost_plus_one FALSE
TRUE
9 _table_scan_cost_plus_one TRUE
TRUE
8 _union_rewrite_for_gs OFF
TRUE
9 _union_rewrite_for_gs CHOOSE
TRUE
8 _unnest_notexists_sq OFF
TRUE
9 _unnest_notexists_sq SINGLE
TRUE
8 optimizer_dynamic_sampling 0
TRUE
9 optimizer_dynamic_sampling 1
TRUE
8 optimizer_max_permutations 80000
TRUE
9 optimizer_max_permutations 2000
TRUE
8 query_rewrite_integrity enforced
TRUE
9 query_rewrite_integrity ENFORCED
TRUE
Regards
Jonathan Lewis
http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk
http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/faq/ind_faq.html
The Co-operative Oracle Users' FAQ
http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/seminar.html
Optimising Oracle Seminar - schedule updated May 1st
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Drake" <discgolfdba@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, June 21, 2004 7:38 PM
Subject: Re: db block size
I kinda need to hijack an instance - kick
cursor_sharing back to exact (can't really use similar
yet, still on o_f_e = 8.1.7 - very long story) and
grab some statements for testing.
We're still not native 9.2 across the board. Need to
get over that hump.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
----------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe send email to: oracle-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
put 'unsubscribe' in the subject line.
--
Archives are at http://www.freelists.org/archives/oracle-l/
FAQ is at http://www.freelists.org/help/fom-serve/cache/1.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------
- References:
- Re: db block size
- From: Paul Drake
Other related posts:
- » db block size
- » RE: db block size
- » RE: db block size
- » Re: db block size
- » Re: db block size
- » Re: db block size
- » Re: db block size
- » Re: db block size
- » Re: db block size
- » RE: db block size
- » RE: db block size
- » Re: db block size
- » Re: db block size
- » RE: db block size
- » Re: db block size
- » RE: db block size
- » Re: db block size
- » Re: db block size
- » RE: db block size
- » RE: db block size
- » RE: db block size
- » Re: db block size
- » Re: db block size
- » Re: db block size
- Re: db block size
- From: Paul Drake