and (not but), I forgot to mention, for really tiny tables, almost always but
especially in RAC, a single table hash cluster is the neatest thing since
sliced bread. Or at least the neatest thing since I read a note by Steve Adam
about how cool they are and tested them myself. (Longer ago than most of you
have been on the planet.)
Hash on that column that tells you the row is for a particular node and Bob’s
yer uncle unless by some anti-miracle they hash together.
(This is NOT to say that single table hash clusters are bad for big tables. Big
tables are not included in the prediction “almost always.” Big tables are often
better served by partitioning and there are other considerations depending on
how big “big” is.)
I encourage you to try a single table hash cluster for this particular one row
per instance table and report the results.
If nothing else, this should remove the gcc issues and retrieve only the single
relevant block by plan so that remaining waits and service times focus more
cleanly on any infrastructure problems.
From: oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Mladen Gogala
Sent: Friday, October 11, 2019 2:40 PM
Subject: Re: LGWR, EMC or app cursors?
And it is possible to set so called Haqqani factor by using "minimize
records_per_block". That number can make a difference for the optimizer.
Jonathan was writing about that long time ago.
On 10/11/19 10:55 AM, Mark W. Farnham wrote:
Apart from any i/o issue, you CAN at least put the rows into different blocks
and avoid the gcc block contention.
You won’t miss the extra 2 blocks.