Did you open an iTar with Oracle? If so, what severity was it logged at? How
you answer certain questions on the iTAR form will impact the severity of
the tar, and as a result the time for responses from Oracle.
RF
-Original Message-
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Sent: 8/7/2003
ug in Oracle
9.2.0.2
You it is a bug
alter session|system set "_unnest_subquery"=false
/
Rajendra dot Jamadagni at nospamespn dot com All Views expressed in this email are strictly persona
Title: RE: possible Bug in Oracle 9.2.0.2
You it is a bug
alter session|system set "_unnest_subquery"=false
/
Rajendra dot Jamadagni at nospamespn dot com
All Views expressed in this email ar
While I am waiting for oracle support to respond to my tar update (2nd
callback) I am just wondering if anybody has found this problem.
We have the following select query (from a peoplesoft implementation)
SELECT a.emplid, a.effdt
FROM PS_JOB A
WHERE A.EFFDT = (SELECT MAX(A1.EFFDT) FROM PS_JOB A
I've no experience with Peoplesoft and Oracle 9, but ..
Try setting the following parameters
optimizer_features_enable = 8.1.6
As I recall this prevented Oracle from incorrectly tossing out some subselects. I'm
not sure if it is even valid in 9iR2
_ignore_desc_in_index = TRUE
Not setting th
Can you please list "select emplid, empl_rcd, effdt, effseq, empl_status
from ps_job where emplid = '3442'"
At 03:34 PM 8/6/2003 -0800, you wrote:
While I am waiting for oracle support to respond to my tar update (2nd
callback) I am just wondering if anybody has found this problem.
We have the f
Title: Message
I
already have :)
-Original Message-From: Jamadagni,
Rajendra [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday,
August 07, 2003 12:04 PMTo: Multiple recipients of list
ORACLE-LSubject: RE: possible Bug in Oracle
9.2.0.2
Tell them ...
Raj
!
-Original Message-From: Browett, Darren
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2003 2:49
PMTo: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-LSubject: RE:
possible Bug in Oracle 9.2.0.2
That
fixed it, thank you.
I
still haven't heard from oracle suppor
Govind.Arumugam,
I also hit two bugs running 9i rac on linux 9.2.0.2.
The first bug is snapshot refresh cannot go on if the data volume is large ,
you have to drop and recreate the snapshot.
>>>19:08:01 SQL> 19:08:01 SQL> 19:08:01 SQL> BEGIN
>>>dbms_snapshot.refresh('snp_a
List,
We
recently upgraded our Production system to 9i and got burnt by these
bugs.
Installed Patch
List:2785282 [ Base Bug(s): 2442125 ]
Bug # 2808431 WRONG RESULTS FOR PARALLEL QUERY WITH HASH AND INDEX
JOIN
Bug # 2783229 Base bug : 2442125 INCORRECT DATA RETURNED FROM DATABASE
WHE
: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Asunto: Re: Oracle 9.2.0.2 performance problem
Just curious: why are you using PGA_AGGREGATE_TARGET? Are there any limits
on memory capacity that you are in danger of exceeding? You have two CPUs
with 4Gb of RAM; I imagine that you're not in any danger, b
good one).
>
>
>
>
> Hemant K
> Chitale To: Multiple recipients of
list ORACLE-L <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> et.com.sg>Subject: Re: Oracle 9.2.0
> > SORT_AREA_SIZE recommendation is a good one).
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Hemant K
> > Chitale To: Multiple recipients of
> list ORACLE-L <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
init.ora files (Hemant's
> SORT_AREA_SIZE recommendation is a good one).
>
>
>
>
> Hemant K
> Chitale To: Multiple recipients of
list ORACLE-L <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
mant's
SORT_AREA_SIZE recommendation is a good one).
Hemant K
Chitale To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20-01-03 -0800, you wrote:
Hello
We have an serious performance problem on a DSS
db.
We buy a new HP rp5405 (2x650Mhz, 4GB, ...)
with HP UX 11.11
Oracle 9.2.0.2 tooks 30 min doing this query
where an Intel 2x1,4 Ghz tooks 9 min only.
We have in the HP losts of buffers(1,5GB), sga(200MB), pga(
Mario, no can do, its already been deleted.
joe
> Broodbakker, Mario would like to recall the message, "Oracle 9.2.0.2
performance problem".
> --
> Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
> --
> Author: Broodbakker, Mario
> INET: [EMAIL PROT
Broodbakker, Mario would like to recall the message, "Oracle 9.2.0.2 performance
problem".
--
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
--
Author: Broodbakker, Mario
INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fat City Network Services-- 858-538-5051 http://www.fatcity.com
ry 20, 2003 7:35 AM
> To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
> Subject: RE: Oracle 9.2.0.2 performance problem
>
>
>
> Hello
>
> We execute the query in the servers, so there is no NET
> problem (I think).
> The data volume is exact (imported).
> Execution path is
L PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2003 7:35 AM
> To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
> Subject: RE: Oracle 9.2.0.2 performance problem
>
>
>
> Hello
>
> We execute the query in the servers, so there is no NET
> problem (I think).
> The data volume is ex
12:19
Para: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Asunto: Re: Oracle 9.2.0.2 performance problem
Juan Miranda,
It seems quite strange,there is little wait event in the statspack
report,
and you execution path should be the same on both platform, right? And is
the data volumn the sa
We buy a new HP rp5405 (2x650Mhz, 4GB, ...) with HP UX 11.11
>
>Oracle 9.2.0.2 tooks 30 min doing this query where an Intel 2x1,4 Ghz tooks
>9 min only.
>
>We have in the HP losts of buffers(1,5GB), sga(200MB), pga(500MB), fast i/O
>(EMC Clariom CX600)...
>We try lost of parame
Hello
We have an serious
performance problem on a DSS db.
We buy a new HP
rp5405 (2x650Mhz, 4GB, ...) with HP UX 11.11
Oracle 9.2.0.2 tooks
30 min doing this query where an Intel 2x1,4 Ghz tooks 9 min only.
We have in the
HP losts of buffers(1,5GB), sga(200MB), pga(500MB), fast i/O
We are thinking about switching to this version on windows OS.
We use:
Rman
Advance replication
OID
Partitioning
Bit map indexes
Any pro / cons about this version?
The other option is 9.2.0.1.
Yechiel Adar
Mehish
--
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.net
--
Author: Yechi
24 matches
Mail list logo
