Re: v$session vs v$resource_limit
- From: coskan gundogar <coskan@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: patty.vonick@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 4 Feb 2012 04:32:23 +0000
Looks like Recursive Sessions are your answer
http://blog.tanelpoder.com/2010/01/21/recursive-sessions-2/
On 3 February 2012 21:28, Patty Vonick <patty.vonick@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi All -
> We have been collecting session counts from v$session - and then compared
> max session counts from v$session for each snapshot... and found that it
> differs from the sessions count in v$resource_limit.
>
> Can anyone explain this?
>
> Thanks for your help.
>
> SYS@PROD1 AS SYSDBA> select count(*) from v$session;
>
> COUNT(*)
> ----------
> 242
>
> SYS@PROD1 AS SYSDBA> select * from v$resource_limit;
>
> RESOURCE_NAME CURRENT_UTILIZATION MAX_UTILIZATION
> INITIAL_AL LIMIT_VALU
> ------------------------------ ------------------- ---------------
> ---------- ----------
> processes 256 330
> 512 512
> sessions 283 395
> 800 800
> enqueue_locks 505 822
> 9616 9616
> enqueue_resources 312 2240
> 4040 UNLIMITED
> ges_procs 0 0
> 0 0
> ges_ress 0 0
> 0 UNLIMITED
> ges_locks 0 0
> 0 UNLIMITED
> ges_cache_ress 0 0
> 0 UNLIMITED
> ges_reg_msgs 0 0
> 0 UNLIMITED
> ges_big_msgs 0 0
> 0 UNLIMITED
> ges_rsv_msgs 0 0
> 0 0
> gcs_resources 0 0
> 0 0
> gcs_shadows 0 0
> 0 0
> dml_locks 1 1
> 3520 UNLIMITED
> temporary_table_locks 0 32
> UNLIMITED UNLIMITED
> transactions 3 3
> 880 UNLIMITED
> branches 0 6
> 880 UNLIMITED
> cmtcallbk 1 18
> 880 UNLIMITED
> max_rollback_segments 60 60
> 880 65535
> sort_segment_locks 2 47
> UNLIMITED UNLIMITED
> k2q_locks 0 0
> 1600 UNLIMITED
> max_shared_servers 0 0
> UNLIMITED UNLIMITED
> parallel_max_servers 106 110
> 36 3600
>
> 23 rows selected.
>
> --
> //www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
>
>
>
--
--
Coskan GUNDOGAR
Oracle DBA
Email: coskan@xxxxxxxxx
Blog: http://coskan.wordpress.com
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/coskan
Linkedin: http://uk.linkedin.com/in/coskan
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Other related posts:
