sort_area_retained_size sizing?

From: Todd Boss <boss_at_i-sphere.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 14:24:27 -0800
Message-ID: <F001.005D6987.20031113142427@fatcity.com>

Hello all.

I'm analyzing an Oracle 8.1.7 server (running over Solaris 5.8) and noticed they've increased the sort_area_size.

SQL> show parameter sort_area

NAME                                 TYPE    VALUE
------------------------------------ ------- ------------------------------
sort_area_retained_size              integer 65536
sort_area_size                       integer 4194304

SQL> However, they have NOT increased the corresponding _retained_size.

I've gone looking for guidelines/info to assist in tuning this particular parameter, but am getting conflicting information.

• In a post by guru Howard J. Rogers to c.d.o.s. regarding a thread where someone specifically asks how to configure these two parameter, He states that he typically configures these two parameters to be the same (but offers no real reason why).
• The concept guide in the Oracle Doc set though seems to indicate that each user performing a sort grabs "sort_area_retained_size" worth of memory, and thus recommends NOT sizing it the same as sort_area_size on systems with a large number of concurrent users.

Any thoughts?

Todd

-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
-- 
Author: Todd Boss
  INET: boss_at_i-sphere.com

Fat City Network Services    -- 858-538-5051 http://www.fatcity.com
San Diego, California        -- Mailing list and web hosting services
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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 Thu Nov 13 2003 - 16:24:27 CST