| Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid | |
 |
 | |||
| Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid | |
|
| |||
Home -> Community -> Mailing Lists -> Oracle-L -> RE: distribution of the sleeps on the library cache latches
Hi Ed,
I would agree with the _kgl_latch_count change, but the _kgl_bucket_count change seems
unwarranted and extreme. Rather I
suspect that the size of your library cache hash table rather reflects an oversized
shared pool, probably with some use
of literal SQL.
@ Regards, @ Steve Adams @ http://www.ixora.com.au/ - For DBAs @ http://www.secularislam.org/call.htm - For Muslims @ http://www.christianity.net.au/ - For all
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Friday, 19 October 2001 18:02
To: ORACLE-L_at_fatcity.com
Cc: Steve Adams
Hi Steve,
thanks for your reply. I'm thinking about twice increasing number of
library latches ( _kgl_latch_count = 23 ) in order to mitigate loading on
them.
Also I would like to set _kgl_bucket_count = 8 according to output of your
script. Do you think it's a good idea in my case.
NAME IMPACT SLEEP_RATE HOLDING LEVEL# ------------------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- library cache 60333579.3 0.32% 172945238 5 shared pool 19313269.2 1.40% 8265405 7 cache buffers chains 1950080.11 0.00% 629411 1 row cache objects 738401.912 0.04% 3369329 4 session allocation 70758.0784 0.01% 144008 5 cache buffer handles 56104.2222 0.01% 71913 3 redo allocation 33494.1227 0.02% 215582 6 cache buffers lru chain 12784.3859 0.00% 198869 3 checkpoint queue latch10980.4325 0.00% 52259 7 latch wait list 9976.33016 0.04% 24412 9 redo writing 4846.5256 0.01% 75484 5
Regards,
Ed
> Hi Ed,
>
> My scripts use the rule of thumb you mention, but it is not a black and
white issue. I would characterise your
> contention here as having a few hot spots, but a general library cache
wide problem as well.
>
> @ Regards,
> @ Steve Adams
> @ http://www.ixora.com.au/
> @ http://www.christianity.net.au/
>
> -----Original Message-----
> Sent: Thursday, 18 October 2001 9:25
> To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
>
>
> Hi List,
>
> what is the criteria of uneven distribution of sleeps on the library cache
latches? Is there a rule
> of thumb to determine uneven distribution? For example, no of sleeps on a
latch is twice bigger than
> average no of the sleeps on the others latches? Is it correct?
>
> Do you estimate the following distribution as uneven?
>
> NAME GETS MISSES SLEEPS SLEEP1 SLEEP2
SLEEP3
> -------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----
-- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com -- Author: Steve Adams INET: steve.adams_at_ixora.com.au Fat City Network Services -- (858) 538-5051 FAX: (858) 538-5051 San Diego, California -- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists -------------------------------------------------------------------- To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message to: ListGuru_at_fatcity.com (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).Received on Fri Oct 19 2001 - 03:30:29 CDT
 |
 |