Re: Shared sql area in 10g versus 9i

>From "An Oracle 10g Upgrade Case Study: Looking at System Performance Before
and After the Upgrade," by Roger Schrag (February 2005) (http://www.dbspecialists.com/presentations/case_study_10g.html):

"In addition to the shared pool having less usable space in Oracle 10g for the same shared_pool_size setting, it also appears that individual SQL statements occupy more space in Oracle 10g's shared SQL area than Oracle 8i's-in our case almost twice as much."

Detailed stats are in the paper.

--Terry

> Does anybody know what is the difference between the
> space needed for the same cursor (SQL) in 9i and 10g?
>
> I have heard about some 2x difference between 8i and
> 10g.
> This will lead to "dramatic" shared_pool_size increase
> in 10g for havy loaded databases.
>
> Anybody has some mathematics available.
>
> I am very curious, because it looks that 10g is much
> more hungry for the cursor space in SQL Area piece of
> shared pool.
>
> All parameters are the same (except maybe
> undocumented) in 9i and 10g and still it looks that
> the cursors in 10g eating much more space.
>
> Regards,
> Zoran
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________
> Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page
> http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
>
> --
> http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
>
>

--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l