| Doubt on "SQL Ordered by Parse Calls" [message #222900] |
Tue, 06 March 2007 21:51  |
gkodakalla
Messages: 49
Registered: March 2005
|
Member |
|
|
Hi,
in the snapshot i generated for a database, i found the section as follows for "SQL ordered by Parse Calls".
SQL ordered by Parse Calls
-> Total Parse Calls: 634,128
-> Captured SQL account for 72.3% of Total
% Total
Parse Calls Executions Parses SQL Id
------------ ------------ --------- -------------
44,441 44,441 7.01 fzxphbq4df76h
.
.
.
I found all the records mentioned in that report have same number for Parse calls and for Executions. Is it okay if we have the number same for "Parse calls" and "Executions". Is it not required to have less parse calls and more executions for a given statement.
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Doubt on "SQL Ordered by Parse Calls" [message #222907 is a reply to message #222900] |
Tue, 06 March 2007 23:10  |
gkodakalla
Messages: 49
Registered: March 2005
|
Member |
|
|
But will this have any impact on soft parse %? For this system, soft parse %age is only 88% now.
What i wanted to know is, if we have the parse count and execution count as same, we are parsing for every execution.
Will it hit performance of the system? Is it not required to have less parses than executions?
Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Doubt on "SQL Ordered by Parse Calls" [message #222947 is a reply to message #222900] |
Wed, 07 March 2007 00:48 |
michael_bialik
Messages: 621
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
There are a number of articles by Tom Kyte (look at google) about performance problems caused by soft parsing.
In your case your application is either using Java/.Net and closes the statement each time or generates dynamic sql and releases the cursor from session-level cache which is not desirable in both cases.
|
|
|
|
] 
Blog
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
