Path: g2news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: "Mark D Powell" <Mark.Pow...@eds.com>
Newsgroups: comp.databases.oracle.server
Subject: Re: Optimizing Database Productivity
Date: 6 Sep 2005 08:17:01 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <1126019821.413669.238810@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
References: <1126010561.298013.21240@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>
   <pan.2005.09.06.13.54.22.686207@telus.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 192.85.50.2
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1126019826 6619 127.0.0.1 (6 Sep 2005 15:17:06 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2005 15:17:06 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: <pan.2005.09.06.13.54.22.686207@telus.net>
User-Agent: G2/0.2
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.0; .NET CLR 1.0.3705; .NET CLR 1.1.4322),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com; posting-host=192.85.50.2;
   posting-account=J7QqBQwAAABTieek3RP_669Gs2iATWzr

Actually even if pga_aggregate_target is in use I am pretty sure you
should still set a value for sort_area_size as there are some
situations where this value will be still be used.  I saw this
demonstrated in a post by Jonathan Lewis recently where he was pointing
out the error in a posted article at a "self-proclaimed" expert site.

I do not know where the article is posted but having a reasonable value
set for sort_area_size when you change pga_aggregate_target to a
non-zero value isn't going to hurt anything so I do not see a downside.

HTH -- Mark D Powell --