Independence Day Deal! Unlock 25% OFF Today – Limited-Time Offer - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions

Oracle Exam 1Z0-078 Topic 9 Question 21 Discussion

Actual exam question for Oracle's 1Z0-078 exam
Question #: 21
Topic #: 9
[All 1Z0-078 Questions]

Examine this query and output:

Performance analysis revealed severe SQ enqueue contention on the SEQ1 sequence.

The SEQ1 sequence is incremented from all instances equally and is frequently used.

Which two statements should you execute to reduce SQ enqueue contention? (Choose two.)

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: B, D

Contribute your Thoughts:

Yoko
2 months ago
Wait, is this a trick question? I feel like the real answer is to sacrifice a goat to the Oracle gods and hope they reduce the contention. These options are as confusing as trying to understand a DBA's stand-up comedy routine.
upvoted 0 times
...
France
2 months ago
I think options A and C are the way to go. Keeping the sequence in the shared pool and removing the ordering constraint should help reduce the contention. But I'm not sure about the syntax either.
upvoted 0 times
Levi
19 days ago
Let's try executing both statements and see if it helps reduce the SQ enqueue contention.
upvoted 0 times
...
Blossom
27 days ago
Option C could also help by removing the ordering constraint on the sequence.
upvoted 0 times
...
Golda
1 months ago
I agree, option A seems like a good choice to keep the sequence in the shared pool.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Lisha
2 months ago
Haha, 'alter sequence seql keep' in option D sounds like a joke. How can you keep a sequence? These options are really making me scratch my head.
upvoted 0 times
...
Annett
2 months ago
Hmm, 'alter sequence seql noorder' in option C seems like it could help, as removing the ordering constraint might reduce contention. But I'm not sure if 'seql' is a typo.
upvoted 0 times
Jenelle
1 months ago
Let's try executing both statements and see if it improves the performance.
upvoted 0 times
...
Alesia
1 months ago
I agree, both options C and D could potentially help with the SQ enqueue contention issue.
upvoted 0 times
...
German
2 months ago
I think option D, 'alter sequence seql keep', could also be beneficial in reducing contention.
upvoted 0 times
...
Elsa
2 months ago
Option C is correct, 'alter sequence seql noorder' can help reduce contention.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Garry
2 months ago
Option B looks promising, a larger cache can help reduce contention. But I'm not sure if 'alter sequence seal cache 10000' is the correct syntax.
upvoted 0 times
...
Royce
2 months ago
But altering the sequence to keep or order might help reduce contention.
upvoted 0 times
...
Kate
2 months ago
I disagree, I believe it's D and E.
upvoted 0 times
...
Royce
2 months ago
I think the answer is B and C.
upvoted 0 times
...
Dominic
2 months ago
But altering the sequence to keep or order might help reduce contention.
upvoted 0 times
...
Aliza
2 months ago
I disagree, I believe it's D and E.
upvoted 0 times
...
Dominic
3 months ago
I think the answer is B and C.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel
az-700  pass4success  az-104  200-301  200-201  cissp  350-401  350-201  350-501  350-601  350-801  350-901  az-720  az-305  pl-300  

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /pass.php:70) in /pass.php on line 77