If you can extract the performance problem from production and replicate it on a non-production system, is the 6x timing issue really an issue? If the 6x stays constant, then you can still compare apples to apples. You can hypothesize the results by factoring in the 6x into your tuning forecast. Query 1 in production takes 10 minutes Query 1 in staging w/10046 takes 60 minutes Tuned Query 1 in staging w/10046 takes 6 minutes Tuned Query 1 in production *should* take 1 minute With a 6x impact, I certainly would not want to be running 10046 in production. <humor> Then again, it is a great opportunity to impress the users. Turn on 10046 in production, watch performance degrade by 6x. Turn off 10046 and watch it improve. Users are happy and totally impressed with your handling of the problems. Of course, to make yourself even more valuable, you could randomly turn on 10046 for a session, wait for the phone call, take a 'smoke break', turn off 10046 and then call the user back in an 'overworked' voice. You can also impress management. Base line the 6x query in staging, tune it a little, then show management the 12x - 120x improvement in production. </humor> Cary Millsap wrote: > Jurijs, > > Even if something takes 6x longer to run the one time you trace it, it's > still better to have the detailed 10046 data than risk being tricked by = > the > aggregation problems introduced by using V$ data. ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 //www.freelists.org/archives/oracle-l/ FAQ is at //www.freelists.org/help/fom-serve/cache/1.html -----------------------------------------------------------------