Mailing List
Home
Forum Home
Oracle List - by freelists.org
Oracle on SUSE Linux - Runing Oracle on SUSE Linux
Oracle database error code ...
www.freelists.org
Subjects
ORA 12540: TNS:internal limit restriction exceeded
ORA 12838 please : Is possible to append two times to the same table befo
ORA 12838 please : Is possible to append two times to the same table before
ora 04031
ora 12500 on windows
ORA 32004: obsolete and/or deprecated parameter(s) specified
ORA 01925: maximum of 30 enabled roles exceeded
ORA 01925: maximum of 30 enabled roles exceeded
ora 12500 on windows
ORA 01650, one idea
ORA 01650
ORA 4030
ORA 12838 please : Is possible to append two times to thesametable before do
ORA 12838 please : Is possible to append two times to thesame table before d
ORA 01536
ORA 03113 end of file on communication channel
ORA 32004: obsolete and/or deprecated parameter(s) specified
ORA 00600:
ORA 00020: maximum number of processes (%s) exceeded
ORA 01925: maximum of 30 enabled roles exceeded
ORA 3113 while creating a cluster database 9201 RAC on Linux with OCFS
ora 12500 on windows
ora 12500 on windows
ora 12500 on windows
ORA 01650, one idea
ora 12500 on windows
ora 12500 on windows
ora 12500 on windows
ORA 2000 Error Using DBMS STATS GATHER SCHEMA STATS
ORA 01650, one idea
ORA 01650, one idea
ORA 01650, one idea
ORA 01650
ORA 01650
Subject: ora 01031
ORA 4030
ORA 4030
ORA 06502: PL/SQL: numeric or value error: Bulk Bind: Truncated Bind
Subject: Re: ORA 01722 invalid number
 
Subject: Re: what 's the difference between "CPU I/O Wait " and "db scatter/sqenecail w

Subject: Re: what 's the difference between "CPU I/O Wait " and "db scatter/sqenecail w

2007-10-03       - By Alberto Dell'Era

 Back
It's not "misleading" as far as you know how it works;
"db file sequential/scattered read" wait time is the time
elapsed from the instant Oracle noticed the buffer
was not in the buffer cache, and the instant it could
resume processing (approximately). So it measures
the whole impact on the "user experience" (i.e, the impact
on the response time for the user request(s) ), which is
better, IMHO, than simply reporting the time spent
waiting for the disks - that could be measured by other means
(e.g. using OS tools).

I've just remembered another article that shows
the importance of knowing exactly the meaning of
"wait time":

http://kevinclosson.wordpress.com/2007/07/21/manly-men-only-use-solid-state
-disk-for-redo-logging-lgwr-io-is-simple-but-not-lgwr-processing/

That article is for the "log file sync" event, but shows
very clearly that wait time is the *total* wait time, not
only the time spent waiting for the disks (note that
at the end, when the author disables logging, the time
waiting for disks is zero, yet the wait time is far from zero ;)

HTH
Alberto

On 10/3/07, qihua wu <staywithpin@(protected)> wrote:
> Hi, Alberto,
>
> Thanks very much for your message.
>
> Based on the formula you mentioned, if the cpu is always 100%busy for a long
> time. Then the time that actually wating to be scheduled will be counted as
> "wait for IO". If this is the case, then oracle will mislead us that IO is
> too busy with the fact that CPU is too busy.
>   t0 := get wallclock time [ gettimeofday() system call ]
>   issue read request to the OS (a system call)
>   ---> the time between the read is completed and oracle process get running
> (if cpu is busy, then this time maybe long) <--
>   t1 := get wallclock time
> Am I right?



--
Alberto Dell'Era
"the more you know, the faster you go"
--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l