Oracle Scratchpad

September 3, 2007

Trace Files

Filed under: trace files,Troubleshooting — Jonathan Lewis @ 8:14 pm GMT Sep 3,2007

If you ever thought you could understand what’s printed in a trace file, you might like to read this comment from a recent SR:

The trace file is reporting the steps that are needed to troubleshoot an issue. The comments tags and entries in the files may not be consistent in every scenario and their meaning can change between tasks and versions. As they are not designed or intended for direct interpretation by customers, no rationale or consistency is guaranteed.

Further, no official documentation is provided for the raw trace files. The only behaviour that is considered ‘expected’ behaviour is that which is contained in the documentation and manuals.

Of course, this does make life a little confusing – is a note that’s been published on Metalink (such as 39817.1 and 338137.1) not official after all ?


  1. Hi Jonathan,

    I think Oracle is doing right doing this remarks in the context of an SR (TAR). For me this means that the SR reviewers/workers deserve “full authority”, as there are internals in the RDBMS that will only be known by them (obviously). So, they have full knowledge and assume full responsability for resolution of the problem (ie: they are getting paid for solve the SR!). All in all I don’t think this statements are meant to discourage customer investigation on the traces. Some SR reviewers appears to fully accept interpretation from the customer.


    Comment by Alvaro — September 4, 2007 @ 11:27 pm GMT Sep 4,2007 | Reply

  2. I’m confused about this one…. Note:33883.1 :)

    Comment by Ted — September 5, 2007 @ 3:15 am GMT Sep 5,2007 | Reply

  3. Ted,
    Note Title: “STATISTIC “cache hit ratio”. Last Revision Date: 12-Feb-2004.

    I’m not surprised you’re confused ;-) Here’s one to think about for 10g: the “better formula for 8i/9i” quoted in the note includes the component:

    ( physical reads - (physical reads direct + physical reads direct (lob)) )

    But in my, “physical reads direct (lob)” are included in “physical reads direct” – so the “better” formula for one version is (even more) wrong for another.

    Comment by Jonathan Lewis — September 5, 2007 @ 6:20 am GMT Sep 5,2007 | Reply

  4. […] about. In few words there was confusion, doubt and something else, or so it seemed. The title was Trace Files. And here you go an inspiration came, and as usual from a direction you’d never […]

    Pingback by Vlad’s Weblog — October 9, 2007 @ 5:06 am GMT Oct 9,2007 | Reply

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

The Rubric Theme. Blog at


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 5,681 other followers