RE: "No bind buffers allocated" and "_optim_peek_user_binds = true"

  • From: <Joel.Patterson@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <sacrophyte@xxxxxxxxx>, <breitliw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2006 14:24:18 -0400

This does sound similar to what my developer is talking about... the
_optim_peek_user_binds is hidden no?  I've never used it.


My statistics_level is typical.  And the version is


Joel Patterson 
Database Administrator 
904  727-2542 


From: oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Charles Schultz
Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2006 9:46 AM
To: Wolfgang Breitling
Cc: Oracle-L Freelists
Subject: Re: "No bind buffers allocated" and "_optim_peek_user_binds =


I filed a bug with Oracle. Apparently, bind buffers are not peeked when
you set statistics_level = ALL in At least, not for my simple

I was using statistics_level = all because it makes Cardinality Feedback
so much simpler (query 2 dictionary tables, as opposed to ripping apart
10046 and 10053 traces). So much for that idea.... 

On 9/12/06, Charles Schultz <sacrophyte@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

This is straight pl/sql issued via sqlplus from the command line on the
same host.


On 9/12/06, Wolfgang Breitling < breitliw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:breitliw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > wrote:

What is the application which shows that? It is possible to for an
to issue a parse call without supplying bind values. There was a problem
with a
version of JDBC which it didn't send bind info, but I believe that is
fixed in
10.2 - assuming the client also has been upgraded to 10.2.
Christian Antognini will know more details about this.

Quoting Charles Schultz <sacrophyte@xxxxxxxxx >:

> Under which circumstances will a bind buffer not be allocated? I was 
> diagnosing a 10053 trace and even though it looks like the bind
> should be peeked, I get empty buffers. The query plan seems to reflect


Wolfgang Breitling
Oracle 7,8,8i,9i OCP DBA 
Centrex Consulting Corporation


Charles Schultz 

Charles Schultz 

Other related posts: