Hi Cary,

This comment made me think.  I agree in most cases, but what about a very
small DB situation where the buffer cache is larger than all the tables and
indexes combined (~300MB)?  This is for a 3rd party tool of which we have no
control over the SQL.  I sized the buffer cache as a guesstimate of load on
concurrent usage in the near future.  As it turns out, the amount of data in
the DB seems to be relatively low, so theoretically, all accessed data and
indexes could be buffered.

My kneejerk is that seems somehow wrong, but I can't think of a downside
offhand.  Care to comment?

Always willing to learn,
Rich Jesse                           System/Database Administrator
[EMAIL PROTECTED]              Quad/Tech International, Sussex, WI USA

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2002 5:05 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L

* If you have a really high database buffer cache hit ratio (>99%), then you
almost certainly have inefficient SQL in your application.
 
Cary Millsap
Hotsos Enterprises, Ltd.
http://www.hotsos.com
-- 
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
-- 
Author: Jesse, Rich
  INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (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).

Reply via email to