Query results cached?

For a report region, is the query results cached?
That is, is the report query being executed again
in the following condition:
* when a user navigate between pages of a report
(from page 1 (1-100 of 1000 rows) to page 2 (101-200 of 1000 rows)
* when a user clicks on the column heading to sort the report

Ken,
In both cases the query is executed again.
Regards,
Marc

Similar Messages

  • Query result caching on oracle 9 and 10 vs indexing

    I am trying to improve performance on oracle 9i and 10g.
    We use some queries that take up to 30 minutes to execute.
    I heard that there are some products to cache query results.
    Would this have any advantage over using indexes or materialized views?
    Does anyone know any products that I can use to cache the results of this queries on disk?
    Personally I think that by using the query result caching I would reduce the cpu time needed to process the query.
    Is this true?

    Your message post pushes all the wrong buttons starting with the fact that 9i and 10g are marketing labels not version numbers.
    You don't tune queries by spending money and throwing resources at them. You tune them by identifying the problem queries, running explain plans, visualizing their output using DBMS_XPLAN, and addressing the root cause.
    If you want help post full version numbers, the SQL statements, and the DBMS_XPLAN outputs.

  • Using the client result cache without the query result cache

    I have constructed a client in C# using ODP.NET to connect to an Oracle database and want to perform client result caching for some of my queries.
    This is done using a result_cache hint in the query.
    select /*+ result_cache */ * from table
    As far as I can tell query result caching on the server is done using the same hint, so I was wondering if there was any way to differentiate between the two? I want the query results to be cached on the client, but not on the server.
    The only way I have found to do this is to disable all caching on the server, but I don't want to do this as I want to use the server cache for PL/SQL function results.
    Thanks.

    e3a934c9-c4c2-4c80-b032-d61d415efd4f wrote:
    I have constructed a client in C# using ODP.NET to connect to an Oracle database and want to perform client result caching for some of my queries.
    This is done using a result_cache hint in the query.
    select /*+ result_cache */ * from table 
    As far as I can tell query result caching on the server is done using the same hint, so I was wondering if there was any way to differentiate between the two? I want the query results to be cached on the client, but not on the server.
    The only way I have found to do this is to disable all caching on the server, but I don't want to do this as I want to use the server cache for PL/SQL function results.
    Thanks.
    You haven't provided ANY information about how you configured the result cache. Different parameters are used for configuring the client versus the server result cache so you need to post what, if anything, you configured.
    Post the code you executed when you set the 'client_result_cache_lag' and 'client_result_cache_size' parameters so we can see what values you used. Also post the results of querying those parameters after you set them that show that they really are set.
    You also need to post your app code that shows that you are using the OCI statements are used when you want to use client side result cacheing.
    See the OCI dev guide
    http://docs.oracle.com/cd/B28359_01/appdev.111/b28395/oci10new.htm#sthref1491
    Statement Caching in OCI
    Statement caching refers to the feature that provides and manages a cache of statements for each session. In the server, it means that cursors are ready to be used without the need to parse the statement again. Statement caching can be used with connection pooling and with session pooling, and will improve performance and scalability. It can be used without session pooling as well. The OCI calls that implement statement caching are:
      OCIStmtPrepare2()
      OCIStmtRelease()

  • Query result cache with functions

    Hi all,
    one of my colleagues has found a little bit weird behavior of a query result cache. He has set result_cache_mode = 'FORCE' (but it can be reproduced with a result_cache hint too) and suddenly functions called from the query get executed twice (for the first time) .
    An easy example:
    alter session set result_cache_mode = 'FORCE';
    create sequence test_seq;
    create or replace function test_f(i number)
    return number
    is                  
    begin
      dbms_output.put_line('TEST_F executed');
      --autonomous transaction or package variable can be used too
      return test_seq.nextval;
    end;
    prompt First call
    select test_f(1) from dual;
    prompt Second call
    select test_f(1) from dual;
    drop sequence test_seq;
    drop function test_f;
    First call
    TEST_F(1)
             2
    TEST_F executed
    TEST_F executed
    Second call
    TEST_F(1)
             1
    As you can see - for the first time the function is executed twice and return the value from the second execution. When I execute the query again it returns the value from the first execution... but it doesn't matter, problem is in the double execution. Our developers used to send emails via select (it's easier for them):
    select send_mail(...) from dual;
    ... and now the customers complains that they get emails twice
    And now the question - is there any way, hot to get rid of this behavior (without changing the parameter back or rewriting code)? I thought that the result cache is automatically disabled for non-deterministic functions...or is this an expected behavior?
    Thanks,
    Ivan

    Interesting.. you are right:
    SELECT /*+ RESULT_CACHE */ 'dog' FROM DUAL;
    And at the second execution:
    | Id  | Operation        | Name                       | Rows  | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |
    |   0 | SELECT STATEMENT |                            |     1 |     2   (0)| 00:00:01 |
    |   1 |  RESULT CACHE    | cc5k01xyqz3ypf9t0j28r5gtd1 |       |            |          |
    |   2 |   FAST DUAL      |                            |     1 |     2   (0)| 00:00:01 |
    Hmmm..

  • Oracle 11g/R2 Query Result Cache - Incremental Update

    Hi,
    In Oracle 11g/R2, I created replica of HR.Employees table & executed the following statement (+Although using SUM() function is non-logical in this case, but just testifying the result+)
    STEP - 1
    SELECT      /+ RESULT_CACHE */ employee_id, first_name, last_name, SUM(salary)*
    FROM           HR.Employees_copy
    WHERE      department_id = 20
    GROUP BY      employee_id, first_name, last_name;
    EMPLOYEE_ID      FIRST_NAME LAST_NAME     SUM(SALARY)
    202           Pat           Fay          6000
    201           Michael           Hartstein     13000
    Elapsed: 00:00:00.01
    Execution Plan
    Plan hash value: 3837552314
    | Id | Operation           | Name | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time |
    | 0 | SELECT STATEMENT      | | 2 | 130 | 4 (25)| 00:00:01 |
    | 1 | RESULT CACHE      | 3acbj133x8qkq8f8m7zm0br3mu | | | | |
    | 2 | HASH GROUP BY      | | 2 | 130 | 4 (25)| 00:00:01 |
    |* 3 | TABLE ACCESS FULL     | EMPLOYEES_COPY | 2 | 130 | 3 (0)| 00:00:01 |
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------     Statistics
    0 recursive calls
    0 db block gets
    0 consistent gets
    0 physical reads
    0 redo size
    *690* bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
    416 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
    2 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
    0 sorts (memory)
    0 sorts (disk)
    2 rows processed
    STEP - 2
    INSERT INTO HR.employees_copy
    VALUES(200, 'Dummy', 'User','[email protected]',NULL, sysdate, 'MANAGER',5000, NULL,NULL,20);
    STEP - 3
    SELECT      /*+ RESULT_CACHE */ employee_id, first_name, last_name, SUM(salary)
    FROM           HR.Employees_copy
    WHERE      department_id = 20
    GROUP BY      employee_id, first_name, last_name;
    EMPLOYEE_ID      FIRST_NAME LAST_NAME SUM(SALARY)
    202      Pat      Fay      6000
    201      Michael      Hartstein      13000
    200      Dummy User      5000
    Elapsed: 00:00:00.03
    Execution Plan
    Plan hash value: 3837552314
    | Id | Operation | Name | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time |
    | 0 | SELECT STATEMENT |          | 3 | 195 | 4 (25)| 00:00:01 |
    | 1 | RESULT CACHE | 3acbj133x8qkq8f8m7zm0br3mu | | | | |
    | 2 | HASH GROUP BY | | 3 | 195 | 4 (25)| 00:00:01 |
    |* 3 | TABLE ACCESS FULL| EMPLOYEES_COPY | 3 | 195 | 3 (0)| 00:00:01 |
         Statistics
    0 recursive calls
    0 db block gets
    4 consistent gets
    0 physical reads
    0 redo size
    *714* bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
    416 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
    2 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
    0 sorts (memory)
    0 sorts (disk)
    3 rows processed
    In the execution plan of STEP-3, against ID-1 the operation RESULT CACHE is shown which shows the result has been retrieved directly from Result cache. Does this mean that Oracle Server has Incrementally Retrieved the resultset?
    Because, before the execution of STEP-2, the cache contained only 2 records. Then 1 record was inserted but after STEP-3, a total of 3 records was returned from cache. Does this mean that newly inserted row is retrieved from database and merged to the cached result of STEP-1?
    If Oracle server has incrementally retrieved and merged newly inserted record, what mechanism is being used by the Oracle to do so?
    Regards,
    Wasif
    Edited by: 965300 on Oct 15, 2012 12:25 AM

    965300 wrote:
    Hi,
    In Oracle 11g/R2, I created replica of HR.Employees table & executed the following statement (+Although using SUM() function is non-logical in this case, but just testifying the result+)
    STEP - 1
    SELECT      /+ RESULT_CACHE */ employee_id, first_name, last_name, SUM(salary)*
    FROM           HR.Employees_copy
    WHERE      department_id = 20
    GROUP BY      employee_id, first_name, last_name;
    EMPLOYEE_ID      FIRST_NAME LAST_NAME     SUM(SALARY)
    202           Pat           Fay          6000
    201           Michael           Hartstein     13000
    Elapsed: 00:00:00.01
    Execution Plan
    Plan hash value: 3837552314
    | Id | Operation           | Name | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time |
    | 0 | SELECT STATEMENT      | | 2 | 130 | 4 (25)| 00:00:01 |
    | 1 | RESULT CACHE      | 3acbj133x8qkq8f8m7zm0br3mu | | | | |
    | 2 | HASH GROUP BY      | | 2 | 130 | 4 (25)| 00:00:01 |
    |* 3 | TABLE ACCESS FULL     | EMPLOYEES_COPY | 2 | 130 | 3 (0)| 00:00:01 |
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------     Statistics
    0 recursive calls
    0 db block gets
    0 consistent gets
    0 physical reads
    0 redo size
    *690* bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
    416 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
    2 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
    0 sorts (memory)
    0 sorts (disk)
    2 rows processed
    STEP - 2
    INSERT INTO HR.employees_copy
    VALUES(200, 'Dummy', 'User','[email protected]',NULL, sysdate, 'MANAGER',5000, NULL,NULL,20);
    STEP - 3
    SELECT      /*+ RESULT_CACHE */ employee_id, first_name, last_name, SUM(salary)
    FROM           HR.Employees_copy
    WHERE      department_id = 20
    GROUP BY      employee_id, first_name, last_name;
    EMPLOYEE_ID      FIRST_NAME LAST_NAME SUM(SALARY)
    202      Pat      Fay      6000
    201      Michael      Hartstein      13000
    200      Dummy User      5000
    Elapsed: 00:00:00.03
    Execution Plan
    Plan hash value: 3837552314
    | Id | Operation | Name | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time |
    | 0 | SELECT STATEMENT |          | 3 | 195 | 4 (25)| 00:00:01 |
    | 1 | RESULT CACHE | 3acbj133x8qkq8f8m7zm0br3mu | | | | |
    | 2 | HASH GROUP BY | | 3 | 195 | 4 (25)| 00:00:01 |
    |* 3 | TABLE ACCESS FULL| EMPLOYEES_COPY | 3 | 195 | 3 (0)| 00:00:01 |
         Statistics
    0 recursive calls
    0 db block gets
    4 consistent gets
    0 physical reads
    0 redo size
    *714* bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
    416 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
    2 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
    0 sorts (memory)
    0 sorts (disk)
    3 rows processed
    In the execution plan of STEP-3, against ID-1 the operation RESULT CACHE is shown which shows the result has been retrieved directly from Result cache. Does this mean that Oracle Server has Incrementally Retrieved the resultset?
    Because, before the execution of STEP-2, the cache contained only 2 records. Then 1 record was inserted but after STEP-3, a total of 3 records was returned from cache. Does this mean that newly inserted row is retrieved from database and merged to the cached result of STEP-1?
    If Oracle server has incrementally retrieved and merged newly inserted record, what mechanism is being used by the Oracle to do so?
    Regards,
    Wasif
    Edited by: 965300 on Oct 15, 2012 12:25 AMNo, the RESULT CACHE operation doesn't necessarily mean that the results are retrieved from there. It could be being
    written to there.
    Look at the number of consistent gets: it's zero in the first step (I assume you had already run this query before) and I would
    conclude that the data is being read from the result cache.
    In the third step there are 4 consistent gets. I would conclude that the data is being written to the result cache, a fourth step repeating
    the SQL should show zero consistent gets and that would be the results being read.

  • SQL Result Cache  vs In-Memory Database Cache

    Hi,
    can anyone help me to understand the relations and differences between the 11 g new features of SQL Result Cache vs In-Memory Database Cache ?
    Thanks

    I highly recommend you read the 11g New Features Guide. Here is a sample from it:
    h4. 1.11.2.9 Query Result Cache
    A separate shared memory pool is now used for storing and retrieving
    cached results. Query retrieval from the query result cache is faster
    than rerunning the query. Frequently executed queries will see
    performance improvements when using the query result cache.
    The new query result cache enables explicit caching of results in
    database memory. Subsequent queries using the cached results will
    experience significant performance improvements.
    See Also:
    [Oracle Database Performance Tuning Guide|http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/B28359_01/server.111/b28274/memory.htm#PFGRF10121] for details
    [Results Cache Concepts|http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/B28359_01/server.111/b28274/memory.htm#PFGRF10121|Results Cache Concepts]
    HTH!

  • Client Result Cache Question

    Hi,
    i am not sure, whether the new feature "Client Result Cache" for OCI - Connections is an enterprise only feature or not.
    The Licensing Information at http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E11882_01/license.112/e10594/editions.htm#CJACGHEB shows this three features are enterprise only:
    Client Side Query Cache
    Query Results Cache
    PL/SQL Function Result Cache
    Which of these are pointing to Client Result Cache? Is it the Query Results Cache? Or something else?
    As an Hint, i am unable to activate the feature on standard edition databases, but i am not sure, if this is the reason or if i am just making some mistakes in configuration/testing.
    Thanks in advance
    Joerg

    we stopped all tests, because it seems to be a enterprise edition only feature.

  • Is result cache, part of PGA or SGA(Shared Pool)

    Is result cache, part of PGA or SGA(Shared Pool). whats is its stand when is is in a dedicated server or a RAC environment

    Server query result cache can only be in SGA otherwise it could not be shared: http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/E11882_01/server.112/e16638/memory.htm#BGBGEACF
    Edited by: P. Forstmann on 28 sept. 2010 09:30

  • Does Result Cache Really Work..

    Does Result Cache Really Work..
    We have upgraded to 11.2.0.2 Theere were some corruption issue we were facing cause of using result cache..
    Still the same error after upgrade...
    Is any one here familiar with using result cache..One good thing about result cahce i found it does improve performance.
    But the problem is the datbaase crashes..after it reaches some memory limit..Does any one have good expereince using it..?

    Probably following notes on Oracle Support site can help.
    11g New Feature PL/SQL Function Result Cache [ID 430887.1]
    11g New Feature : SQL Query Result Cache [ID 453567.1]
    PL/SQL Procedures Do Not Switch Result Cache Mode Within The Same Session [ID 556035.1]
    HTH

  • DB buffer cache vs. SQL query & PL/SQL function result cache

    Hi all,
    Started preparing for OCA cert. just myself using McGraw Hill's exam guide. Have a question about memory structures.
    Actually, DB buffer cache is used to copy e.g. SELECT queries result data blocks, that can be reused by another session (server process).
    There is also additional otion - SQL query & PL/SQL function result cache (from 11g), where also stored the results of such queries.
    Do they do the same thing or nevertheless there is some difference, different purpose?
    thanks in advance...

    There is also additional otion - SQL query & PL/SQL function result cache (from 11g), where also stored the results of such queries.Result cache located in shared pool.So it is one component of shared pool.When server process execute query(and if you configured result cache) then result will store in shared pool.Then next execution time run time mechanism will detect and consider using result cache without executing this query(if data was not changed this is happen detection time)
    Do they do the same thing or nevertheless there is some difference, different purpose?.Buffer cache and result cache are different things and purpose also,but result cache introduced to improve response time of query in 11g(but such mechanism also implemented in 10g subquery execution,in complex query).In buffer cache holds data blocks but not such results.
    Edited by: Chinar on Nov 4, 2011 4:40 AM
    (Removing lots of "But" word from sentences :-) )

  • Cannot query using both conforming and cached query result

    TopLink doesn't allow me to both use conforming and cached query result at the same time.
    Conforming is certainly not a superset of the [cached query result] features.
    Can you confirm that it's a limitation of TopLink?
    Any know workaround to end-up with the same features as using both conforming and cached query result?
    Conforming is about seeing modifications you do in the same transaction. As a bonus, if you query for one object and specify at least the id as criteria because TopLink will have to check in memory anyway it can avoid going to the database.
    But if I do a query like "give me employees hired before now and after 30 days ago" it's about more than one objects and about finding existance so cached query result is needed to get acceptable performance in a complex application trying to avoid the same SQL generated over and over again.

    Thats where the trace just ends? It doesnt look like there's any LIKE or filtering going on (with respect to the Oracle pieces anyway), apparently MSAccess simply requested the whole table.
    What do you mean by 'hang' exactly? Are you sure it's just not taking a long time to complete? How long have you waited? How fast does it complete on the other environment?
    ODBC tracing isnt likely to help much for that. SQLNet tracing would be better to see what is going on at a lower level. Specifically, what is going on at the network level? Is the client waiting for a packet to be returned from the database?
    Is the database having a hard time processing the query, perhaps due to index/tuning issues?
    Assuming that is indeed the query that is "hung", how much data does that return?
    Are you able to reproduce the same behavior with that query and vbscript for example?
    Greg

  • cache-query-results question

    I have another post for general descriptor tag information but I do have a specific question. In a project I am looking at I see:
    <cache-usage> check cache by primary key </cache-usage>
    <cache-query-results>false</cache-query-results>
    <maintain-cache>true</maintain-cache>
    I'm not sure how to interpret this. Does this mean that a cache is in place or not? cache-query-rests is set to false which implies no caching, yet the other parameters imply a cache is in place. What overrides here?
    Thanks

    The XML maps directly to the API so the JavaDocs and related documentation are the best tools:
    cache-usage: query.setCacheUsage(int)
    This option indicates how the object cache should be used when processing the query. This is how in-memory query is configured as well as support for cache-hits on ReadObjectQuery.
    cache-query-result: query.setShouldCacheQueryResults(boolean)
    This option allows you to indicate that the results returned from the query execution should be held. When the query is executed again these results will be returned without going to the database or searching the object cache. This is just caching the results locally within the query.
    maintain-cache: query.maintainCache() or query.dontMaintainCache()
    This setting determines if the results returned from the query should be cached in the shared object cache. It is on by default and turning this off is very rare. Occasionally done to compare the cache version with the database verision when handling an optimistic locking failure.
    Doug

  • How to force Work Item Query Policy to refresh its cached query results?

    I have enabled the Work Item Query Policy on my TFS project.  It works as expected, except when using Visual Studio 2013 with the following sequence of steps:
    User selects Check in Pending Changes from the Source Control Explorer
    User enters in the ID of the work item to be associated to the changeset
    User clicks the Check In button
    Work Item Query Policy displays message ' Work item ##### was not found in the results of stored query...'
    User realizes his mistake, and modifies (and saves) the work item so that it is returned in in the query result set
    User clicks the Check In button again expecting the TFS policy to accept the association
    Work Item Query Policy still displays message ' Work item ##### was not found in the results of stored query...'
    Removing the Work Item and re-associating it does not make a difference.  The only workaround that I have found is to close Visual Studio and reopen it.  Does any one have a better solution than this?

    Our setup is different from the one you are using:
    - User is using VS 2013 Update 4.
    - We are running TFS 2010 SP1
    The test case that you described is different from the one that is causing my problem (that scenario works fine for me as well).  I am trying to associate the check in to the same work item both times; whereas, you are associating it to a different
    work item the second time.  I can consistently reproduce the error using the following steps:
    1) Create a query that returns All Bugs in Active state, and set it as the query for the Work Item Query Policy
    2) Create and save a new Bug
    3) Run the query to confirm that the new bug does not appear in the result set
    4) Checkout a file, modify it, save it
    5) Check in the file and associate it to the bug from step 2)
    - the Work Item Query Policy will issue an error message saying that the work item cannot be found in the associated query
    6) Change the state of the bug to Active, and save
    7) Refresh the query to confirm that the bug now appears in the result set
    8) Check in the file again
    - error message from step 5) will not go away

  • Large query result set

    Hi all,
    At the moment we have some java classes (not ejb - cmp/bmp) for search in
    our ejb application.
    Now we have a problem i.e. records have grown too high( millions ) and
    sometimes query results in retrieval of millions of records. It results in
    too much memory consumtion in our ejb application. What is the best way to
    address this issue.
    Any help will be highly appreciated.
    Thanks & regards,
    Parvez

    you can think of following options
    1) paging: read only few thousands at a time and maintain a index to page
    through complete dataset
    2) caching!
    a) you can create a serialized data file in server to cache the result set
    and can use that to browse through. you may do on the fly
    compression/uncompression while sending data to client.
    b) applet based solution where caching could be in client side. Look in
    http://www.sitraka.com/software/jclass/cs_ims.html
    thanks,
    Srinivas
    "chauhan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    Thanks Slava Imeshev,
    We already have search criteria and a limit. When records exceeds thatlimit
    then we prompt user that it may take sometime, do you want to proceed? If
    he clicks yes then we retrieve those records. This results in lot ofmemory
    consumtion.
    I was thinking if there is some way that from database I can retrieve some
    block of records at a time rather the all records of a query. I wander how
    internet search sites work, where thousnds of sites/pages match criteriaand
    client can move back & front on any page.
    Regards,
    Parvez
    "Slava Imeshev" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    Hi chauhan,
    You may want to narrow search criteria along with processing a
    limited number of resulting records. I.e. if the size of the result
    is bigger than a limit, you stop fetching results and notify the client
    that search criteria should be narrowed.
    HTH.
    Regards,
    Slava Imeshev
    "chauhan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    Hi all,
    At the moment we have some java classes (not ejb - cmp/bmp) for
    search
    in
    our ejb application.
    Now we have a problem i.e. records have grown too high( millions ) and
    sometimes query results in retrieval of millions of records. It
    results
    in
    too much memory consumtion in our ejb application. What is the best
    way
    to
    address this issue.
    Any help will be highly appreciated.
    Thanks & regards,
    Parvez

  • Oracle 11g result cache and TimesTen

    Oracle 11g has introduced the concept of result cache whereby the result set of frequently executed queries are stored in cache and used later when other users request the same query. This is different from caching the data blocks and exceuting the query over and over again.
    Tom Kyte calls this just-in-time materialized view whereby the results are dynamically evaluated without DBA intervention
    http://www.oracle.com/technology/oramag/oracle/07-sep/o57asktom.html
    My point is that in view of utilities like result_cache and possible use of Solid State Disks in Oracle to speed up physical I/O etc is there any need for a product like TimesTen? It sounds to me that it may just asdd another layer of complexity?

    Oracle result cache ia a useful tool but it is distinctly different from TimesTen. My understanding of Oracle's result cache is caching results set for seldom changing data like look up tables (currencies ID/code), reference data that does not change often (list of counter parties) etc. It would be pointless for caching result set where the underlying data changes frequently.
    There is also another argument for SQL result cache in that if you are hitting high on your use of CPUs and you have enough of memory then you can cache some of the results set thus saving on your CPU cycles.
    Considering the arguments about hard wired RDBMS and Solid State Disks (SSD), we can talk about it all day but having SSD does not eliminate the optimiser consideration for physical I/O. A table scan is a table scan whether data resides on SCSI or SSD disk. SSD will be faster but we are still performing physical IOs.
    With regard to TimesTen, the product positioning is different. TimesTen is closer to middletier than Oracle. It is designed to work closely to application layer whereas Oracle has much wider purpose. For real time response and moderate volumes there is no way one can substitue TimesTen with any hard wired RDBMS. The request for result cache has been around for sometime. In areas like program trading and market data where the underlying data changes rapidly, TimesTen will come very handy as the data is real time/transient and the calculations have to be done almost realtime, with least complications from the execution engine. I fail to see how one can deploy result cache in this scenario. Because of the underlying change of data, Oracle will be forced to calculate the queries almost everytime and the result cache will be just wasted.
    Hope this helps,
    Mich

Maybe you are looking for