Not yet. The 1.5 is still larger than what the error is complaining about and it is on the target, not the catalog, and the errors says it's a RPC error, which makes it look like the catalog is the problem. Have you seen something like this to make you think it is actually the target?
On Mon, 2006-07-17 at 13:31 +0100, David Sharples wrote: > Thats a 1.5Mb large pool in one of the instances, have you tried > increasing it > > On 17/07/06, John P Weatherman <asahoshi@(protected)> wrote: > All, > > > > NAME TYPE VALUE > -- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- --- -- ---- --- > -- ---- ---- ---- ----- > large_pool_size big integer 33554432 > shared_pool_reserved_size big integer 26843545 > shared_pool_size big integer 536870912 > > as should the target (though the errors says it is coming from > the RPC, > so this shouldn't be the issue): > > NAME TYPE VALUE > -- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- --- -- ---- --- > -- ---- ---- ---- ----- > large_pool_size string 1572792 > shared_pool_reserved_size string 2000000 > shared_pool_size string 20000000 > > >
