<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: System Stats strategy</title>
	<atom:link href="http://jonathanlewis.wordpress.com/2007/05/20/system-stats-strategy/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://jonathanlewis.wordpress.com/2007/05/20/system-stats-strategy/</link>
	<description>Just another Oracle weblog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 May 2013 17:10:14 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rameez</title>
		<link>http://jonathanlewis.wordpress.com/2007/05/20/system-stats-strategy/#comment-39638</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Rameez]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Feb 2011 11:11:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jonathanlewis.wordpress.com/2007/05/20/system-stats-strategy/#comment-39638</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[As the costing will be done using _db_file_optimizer_read_count which is set at startup that means it is same as the costing done using system statistics (Standard cpu_costing) and there is no variation when the cost changes with the size of the multiblock read with NWLOAD(noworkload cpu_costing)

The only difference between noworkload stats and workload stats (for mbrc) is that, in noworkload &quot;_db_file_optimizer_read_count&quot; can be altered at session level which will be only useful for testing and won&#039;t work at system level.

So it means the &quot;cost is dictated by a fixed MBRC and therefore does not
change as we modify the multiblock read size&quot; in both.

Could you please crosscheck and correct me if I&#039;m missing something.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As the costing will be done using _db_file_optimizer_read_count which is set at startup that means it is same as the costing done using system statistics (Standard cpu_costing) and there is no variation when the cost changes with the size of the multiblock read with NWLOAD(noworkload cpu_costing)</p>
<p>The only difference between noworkload stats and workload stats (for mbrc) is that, in noworkload &#8220;_db_file_optimizer_read_count&#8221; can be altered at session level which will be only useful for testing and won&#8217;t work at system level.</p>
<p>So it means the &#8220;cost is dictated by a fixed MBRC and therefore does not<br />
change as we modify the multiblock read size&#8221; in both.</p>
<p>Could you please crosscheck and correct me if I&#8217;m missing something.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jonathan Lewis</title>
		<link>http://jonathanlewis.wordpress.com/2007/05/20/system-stats-strategy/#comment-39618</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jonathan Lewis]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Feb 2011 19:09:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jonathanlewis.wordpress.com/2007/05/20/system-stats-strategy/#comment-39618</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Rameez,

Sorry about the delay responding.

When you gather NOWORKLOAD statistics, I believe Oracle uses the _db_file_optimizer_read_count in place of the MBRC to derive a value for mreadtim.  But I haven&#039;t done enough  experiments with using alter system and alter session to confirm all the details of how settting db_file_multiblock_read_count can affect the value of _db_file_optimizer_read_count, and whether this will then echo on to the calculation of mreadtim.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Rameez,</p>
<p>Sorry about the delay responding.</p>
<p>When you gather NOWORKLOAD statistics, I believe Oracle uses the _db_file_optimizer_read_count in place of the MBRC to derive a value for mreadtim.  But I haven&#8217;t done enough  experiments with using alter system and alter session to confirm all the details of how settting db_file_multiblock_read_count can affect the value of _db_file_optimizer_read_count, and whether this will then echo on to the calculation of mreadtim.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rameez</title>
		<link>http://jonathanlewis.wordpress.com/2007/05/20/system-stats-strategy/#comment-39606</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Rameez]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Feb 2011 18:20:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jonathanlewis.wordpress.com/2007/05/20/system-stats-strategy/#comment-39606</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[After tracing using 10046 its been noticed that &quot;alter system&quot; works as expected (i.e use _db_file_exec_read_count value for execution) but the costing will be done using the value set for _db_file_optimizer_read_count at startup unless its done at &quot;alter session&quot;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>After tracing using 10046 its been noticed that &#8220;alter system&#8221; works as expected (i.e use _db_file_exec_read_count value for execution) but the costing will be done using the value set for _db_file_optimizer_read_count at startup unless its done at &#8220;alter session&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rameez</title>
		<link>http://jonathanlewis.wordpress.com/2007/05/20/system-stats-strategy/#comment-39594</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Rameez]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Feb 2011 13:07:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jonathanlewis.wordpress.com/2007/05/20/system-stats-strategy/#comment-39594</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hi Jonathan,

Could you please explain above differences.

Also while I was finding Adjusted dbf_mbrc for different mbrc it is found that when using &quot;alter system&quot; for mbrc it is not effecting and have to bounce the db in order to use changed value.
Though using &quot;alter session&quot; works as expected.
So that means the value taken by db_file_mbrc at startup is being applied unless db is bounced after change. (10.2.0.4)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Jonathan,</p>
<p>Could you please explain above differences.</p>
<p>Also while I was finding Adjusted dbf_mbrc for different mbrc it is found that when using &#8220;alter system&#8221; for mbrc it is not effecting and have to bounce the db in order to use changed value.<br />
Though using &#8220;alter session&#8221; works as expected.<br />
So that means the value taken by db_file_mbrc at startup is being applied unless db is bounced after change. (10.2.0.4)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rameez</title>
		<link>http://jonathanlewis.wordpress.com/2007/05/20/system-stats-strategy/#comment-39588</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Rameez]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Feb 2011 16:32:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jonathanlewis.wordpress.com/2007/05/20/system-stats-strategy/#comment-39588</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Correct after reset and bounce it will set _db_file_optimizer_read_count to 8.

So when we collect NOWORKLOAD it will use _db_file_optimizer_read_count for costing and when we collect WORKLOAD stats then it will use db_file_mutliblock_read_count for costing.

So could you please throw some light as what is the difference and how it will calculate the cost in both cases?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Correct after reset and bounce it will set _db_file_optimizer_read_count to 8.</p>
<p>So when we collect NOWORKLOAD it will use _db_file_optimizer_read_count for costing and when we collect WORKLOAD stats then it will use db_file_mutliblock_read_count for costing.</p>
<p>So could you please throw some light as what is the difference and how it will calculate the cost in both cases?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nadezhda</title>
		<link>http://jonathanlewis.wordpress.com/2007/05/20/system-stats-strategy/#comment-39585</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Nadezhda]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Feb 2011 06:41:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jonathanlewis.wordpress.com/2007/05/20/system-stats-strategy/#comment-39585</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Rameez, I think the only way to receive the default values the hidden parameters is to unset mbrc with the ALTER SYSTEM RESET command: alter system reset db_file_multiblock_read_count scope=spfile sid=&#039;*&#039;;
And restart .
Or (that’s the same)
Actually remove db_file_multiblock_read_count  from the parameter file and restart using it. 
It seems to me that when explicitly set db_file_multiblock_read_count to anything (including zero) this will then over-ride the default  hidden parameters. In spite of the documetation (see my post above) said it may be zero or reset , but it maybe that setting zero is not the same thing as unsetting it with the ALTER SYSTEM RESET command]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Rameez, I think the only way to receive the default values the hidden parameters is to unset mbrc with the ALTER SYSTEM RESET command: alter system reset db_file_multiblock_read_count scope=spfile sid=&#8217;*';<br />
And restart .<br />
Or (that’s the same)<br />
Actually remove db_file_multiblock_read_count  from the parameter file and restart using it.<br />
It seems to me that when explicitly set db_file_multiblock_read_count to anything (including zero) this will then over-ride the default  hidden parameters. In spite of the documetation (see my post above) said it may be zero or reset , but it maybe that setting zero is not the same thing as unsetting it with the ALTER SYSTEM RESET command</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jonathan Lewis</title>
		<link>http://jonathanlewis.wordpress.com/2007/05/20/system-stats-strategy/#comment-39579</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jonathan Lewis]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Feb 2011 21:58:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jonathanlewis.wordpress.com/2007/05/20/system-stats-strategy/#comment-39579</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Rameez,

You&#039;re absolutely right - I should have checked it sooner.

I&#039;ve just run up a 10.2.0.4, and if I set db_file_multiblock_read_count to zero in the pfile and restart then the optimizer read count follows the db_file_multiblock_read_count, which sets itself the the largest it can.  (In fact in my case it went to 79 because of my settings for &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;db_cache_size&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;&lt;strong&gt;sessions&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/em&gt;, rather than 128).]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Rameez,</p>
<p>You&#8217;re absolutely right &#8211; I should have checked it sooner.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve just run up a 10.2.0.4, and if I set db_file_multiblock_read_count to zero in the pfile and restart then the optimizer read count follows the db_file_multiblock_read_count, which sets itself the the largest it can.  (In fact in my case it went to 79 because of my settings for <em><strong>db_cache_size</strong></em> and <em><strong>sessions</strong></em>, rather than 128).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rameez</title>
		<link>http://jonathanlewis.wordpress.com/2007/05/20/system-stats-strategy/#comment-39576</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Rameez]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Feb 2011 15:21:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jonathanlewis.wordpress.com/2007/05/20/system-stats-strategy/#comment-39576</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Thanks for your quick reply, But after bouncing I&#039;m receiving same value.

SQL&gt; alter system set db_file_multiblock_read_count=0 scope=spfile;

System altered.

SQL&gt; shutdown immediate;
Database closed.
Database dismounted.
ORACLE instance shut down.
SQL&gt; conn / as sysdba
Connected to an idle instance.
SQL&gt; startup
ORACLE instance started.

Total System Global Area 1207959552 bytes
Fixed Size                  2083528 bytes
Variable Size             771753272 bytes
Database Buffers          419430400 bytes
Redo Buffers               14692352 bytes
Database mounted.
Database opened.

NAME VALUE
—— —–
db_file_multiblock_read_count 128
_db_file_exec_read_count 128
_db_file_optimizer_read_count 128]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for your quick reply, But after bouncing I&#8217;m receiving same value.</p>
<p>SQL&gt; alter system set db_file_multiblock_read_count=0 scope=spfile;</p>
<p>System altered.</p>
<p>SQL&gt; shutdown immediate;<br />
Database closed.<br />
Database dismounted.<br />
ORACLE instance shut down.<br />
SQL&gt; conn / as sysdba<br />
Connected to an idle instance.<br />
SQL&gt; startup<br />
ORACLE instance started.</p>
<p>Total System Global Area 1207959552 bytes<br />
Fixed Size                  2083528 bytes<br />
Variable Size             771753272 bytes<br />
Database Buffers          419430400 bytes<br />
Redo Buffers               14692352 bytes<br />
Database mounted.<br />
Database opened.</p>
<p>NAME VALUE<br />
—— —–<br />
db_file_multiblock_read_count 128<br />
_db_file_exec_read_count 128<br />
_db_file_optimizer_read_count 128</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jonathan Lewis</title>
		<link>http://jonathanlewis.wordpress.com/2007/05/20/system-stats-strategy/#comment-39572</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jonathan Lewis]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Feb 2011 13:20:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jonathanlewis.wordpress.com/2007/05/20/system-stats-strategy/#comment-39572</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Rameez,

The important point, though, is that if you set db_file_multiblock_read_count to zero (in 10.2.0.4+) in the spfile and restart the database then the _db_file_optimizer_read_count will default to 8, and not follow.  i.e. &quot;alter system&quot; and &quot;bounce database&quot; have different effects.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Rameez,</p>
<p>The important point, though, is that if you set db_file_multiblock_read_count to zero (in 10.2.0.4+) in the spfile and restart the database then the _db_file_optimizer_read_count will default to 8, and not follow.  i.e. &#8220;alter system&#8221; and &#8220;bounce database&#8221; have different effects.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rameez</title>
		<link>http://jonathanlewis.wordpress.com/2007/05/20/system-stats-strategy/#comment-39571</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Rameez]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Feb 2011 13:07:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jonathanlewis.wordpress.com/2007/05/20/system-stats-strategy/#comment-39571</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I tested on 2 different database with same Oracle(10.2.0.4) and OS (OEL)

1)On first db block_size=16k after setting dbmbrc to 0 following is the result

NAME				VALUE
------				-----
db_file_multiblock_read_count	64
_db_file_exec_read_count 	64
_db_file_optimizer_read_count 	64

2) On second db block_size=8k after setting dbmbrc to 0 following is the result 

NAME				VALUE
------				-----
db_file_multiblock_read_count	128
_db_file_exec_read_count 	128
_db_file_optimizer_read_count 	128

Then on 2nd db 
SQL&gt; alter system set db_file_multiblock_read_count=64 scope=memory;

NAME				VALUE
------				-----
db_file_multiblock_read_count	64
_db_file_exec_read_count 	64
_db_file_optimizer_read_count 	64

So it seems it works on 10.2.0.4 without bouncing the db.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I tested on 2 different database with same Oracle(10.2.0.4) and OS (OEL)</p>
<p>1)On first db block_size=16k after setting dbmbrc to 0 following is the result</p>
<p>NAME				VALUE<br />
&#8212;&#8212;				&#8212;&#8211;<br />
db_file_multiblock_read_count	64<br />
_db_file_exec_read_count 	64<br />
_db_file_optimizer_read_count 	64</p>
<p>2) On second db block_size=8k after setting dbmbrc to 0 following is the result </p>
<p>NAME				VALUE<br />
&#8212;&#8212;				&#8212;&#8211;<br />
db_file_multiblock_read_count	128<br />
_db_file_exec_read_count 	128<br />
_db_file_optimizer_read_count 	128</p>
<p>Then on 2nd db<br />
SQL&gt; alter system set db_file_multiblock_read_count=64 scope=memory;</p>
<p>NAME				VALUE<br />
&#8212;&#8212;				&#8212;&#8211;<br />
db_file_multiblock_read_count	64<br />
_db_file_exec_read_count 	64<br />
_db_file_optimizer_read_count 	64</p>
<p>So it seems it works on 10.2.0.4 without bouncing the db.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
