RE: Long term AWR retention

  • From: John Hallas <John.Hallas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: "mwf@xxxxxxxx" <mwf@xxxxxxxx>, "dackoc@xxxxxxxxx" <dackoc@xxxxxxxxx>, "mark.teehan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <mark.teehan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 16:17:43 +0100

Exactly what we are setting up at the moment (it gives the added benefit of 
being a good reason to get 11GR2 into semi-production)

One thing we noticed when keeping snapshots 90 days at 15 minute intervals was 
the growth in SYSAUX tablespace and the opt$stat tables and indices

See my blog entry 
http://jhdba.wordpress.com/2009/05/19/purging-statistics-from-the-sysaux-tablespace/

www.jhdba.wordpress.com

________________________________
From: oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Mark W. Farnham
Sent: 27 June 2010 17:42
To: dackoc@xxxxxxxxx; mark.teehan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: Long term AWR retention

Lots of good insights and responses in this thread. But I have a question:

Why do so few people copy database metric data to a non-production machine? 
(And AWR is just a start.)

Shouldn't every DBA and/or DBA team have a DBA's data warehouse? Why use 
production cpu cycles to analyze anything but real time or near real time 
concerns?

Why wonder about year-over-year trends when you can know? Wouldn't improved 
ability to make a capacity plan based on actual data more than pay for any 
associated costs?

mwf
________________________________
From: oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:oracle-l-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Carol Dacko
Sent: Friday, June 25, 2010 5:10 PM
To: mark.teehan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Long term AWR retention

Mark,
We use 6 month retention with 15 minute snapshots.  No problems!  It has been 
very helpful to have the history available to us.

Carol Dacko
University of Michigan
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 10:24 PM, Teehan, Mark 
<mark.teehan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:mark.teehan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
I  am considering increasing AWR retention from the default 7 days to a longer 
period; possibly 60 days. A longer cycle fits in better with systems that have 
monthly reporting cycles. Apart from increased space use in sysaux, leading to 
longer full backup times; I cannot think of any other negative effects. All AWR 
base tables are range partitioned; and I trust that all queries accessing them 
are configured to partition prune properly.

I cannot find any evidence in MOS or the interwebs that this could be a bad 
thing to do: has anyone been burned by this before?

Thanks!
Mark Teehan
Singapore

==============================================================================
Please access the attached hyperlink for an important electronic communications 
disclaimer:
http://www.credit-suisse.com/legal/en/disclaimer_email_ib.html
==============================================================================



______________________________________________________________________
Wm Morrison Supermarkets Plc is registered in England with number 358949. The 
registered office of the company is situated at Gain Lane, Bradford, West 
Yorkshire BD3 7DL. This email and any attachments are intended for the 
addressee(s) only and may be confidential. 

If you are not the intended recipient, please inform the sender by replying to 
the email that you have received in error and then destroy the email. 
If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose, copy or rely 
on the email or its attachments in any way. 

This email does not constitute a contract in writing for the purposes of the 
Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989.

Our Standard Terms and Conditions of Purchase, as may be amended from time to 
time, apply to any contract that we enter into. The current version of our 
Standard Terms and Conditions of Purchase is available at: 
http://www.morrisons.co.uk/gscop

Although we have taken steps to ensure the email and its attachments are 
virus-free, we cannot guarantee this or accept any responsibility, 
and it is the responsibility of recipients to carry out their own virus checks. 
______________________________________________________________________

Other related posts: