Re: Default optimizer_index_caching value DUMB ...

From: <ctcgag_at_hotmail.com>
Date: 29 Oct 2004 16:30:47 GMT
Message-ID: <20041029123047.425$gR@newsreader.com>

"Niall Litchfield" <niall.litchfield_at_dial.pipex.com> wrote:

> Jonathan Lewis has an article on system statistics being potentially
> unfortunate for you on his site that in passing deals with the problem
> that O_I_C_A and O_I_C are both system wide measures and , typically,
> it is process level problems that we wish to deal with.

I've pondered the possibility that there could be more than one Nash equilibrium with these setting. If you tell CBO that indices aren't cached, then it will choose FTS and the indices won't be used and hence won't be cached. But if you tell CBO the indices are cached, then it will choose to use them, which will cause them to become cached.

Xho

-- 
-------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
Usenet Newsgroup Service                        $9.95/Month 30GB

Received on Fri Oct 29 2004 - 11:30:47 CDT