Post #69,986
12/19/02 4:51:17 PM
|
Good points all.
Clipper hasn't been unreliable and there are some very good ClipperHeads here (I was a Clipperhead myself for about 8 years). The main problem is that the company has outgrown Clipper's ability to handle the amount of data Clipper can adequately handle. They have a slew of graphing applications that suck the data out of a database. All of these apps use SQL to retrieve the data. Unfortunately, none of the people hired (either directly or as consultants) to do the 400 work know anything about Sql - I'm not flaming them, just stating a fact. They've all told me that they've "never used an Sql interface to data".
I'm not an anti-DB2 bigot, but DB2/400 is a completely different product from the "real" DB2 UDB (or whatever they're calling it these days, i.e. DB2/400 has just gotten a "Serial"/"Identity" data type with the new release). At any rate, the way the 400 is used at this site, Sql performance sucks rocks big time. It's an iSeries, but I don't know the exact model. I do know it only has one processor (that may be typical of 400's I dunno) but just one user running one graphical app can use up nearly all the resources on the box and bring the system to its knees. This may all be config issues, coding issues, table design issues, I dunno. But so far, the "solution" to bad performance has been to spend enough on upgrades to pay for several quad-Intel boxes.
I'm not opposed to text-based UI's (particularly for large data sets), but when the SQL performance is this bad in a situation where SQL performance is tremendously important, I just don't get it. I mean, I know its more convenient to use something you're already familiar with, but man, this is like watching a train wreck in slow motion.
bcnu,
Mikem
|
Post #69,997
12/19/02 5:33:33 PM
12/19/02 6:11:48 PM
|
Wanna be a hero?
I've seen performance problems that seem similar before. Turn on the 'performance adjustment' - some admins with experience on older versions of OS/400 turn this off (it used to be really bad). To turn it on, use: wrksysval qpfradj and select '3' (automatic adjustment). If you don't want to turn on the performance adjustment, memory pools can be adjusted manually with wrksyssts - use f11 for different views. I've seen the performance adjustment (post v4 OS/400, anyway) make dramatic performance gains, though...
Imric's Tips for Living- Paranoia Is a Survival Trait
- Pessimists are never disappointed - but sometimes, if they are very lucky, they can be pleasantly surprised...
- Even though everyone is out to get you, it doesn't matter unless you let them win.
Edited by imric
Dec. 19, 2002, 05:34:20 PM EST
Edited by imric
Dec. 19, 2002, 06:11:48 PM EST
|
Post #69,999
12/19/02 5:45:26 PM
|
Boggle
To get turn it on, use:
wrksysval qpfradj
and select '3' (automatic adjustment). Man, if I didn't know any better - I'd say that looks like somebody smacking the keyboard to make random values come out. Gimli's Rules for Surviving in Middle Earth #43: When attempting to destroy an artifact, remember to use somebody else's axe.
|
Post #70,001
12/19/02 5:49:53 PM
|
Used to think the same thing...
...but its actually relatively easy to get used to.
Once you know what everything is called...you can almost start to guess what the IBM folks ended up using for the command abbreviation.
You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! Laurie Anderson
[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
|
Post #70,003
12/19/02 6:10:39 PM
|
*chuckle*
Command names are pieced together from 1, 2, or 3 letter 'pieces' like, wrk for work, sys for system, dsp for display, f, for files, etc. wrksysval actually means "work with system values" dspf means "display file" cpyf is "copy file", etc, etc.
As bepatient says, its actually not hard to get used to.
Imric's Tips for Living- Paranoia Is a Survival Trait
- Pessimists are never disappointed - but sometimes, if they are very lucky, they can be pleasantly surprised...
- Even though everyone is out to get you, it doesn't matter unless you let them win.
|
Post #70,035
12/19/02 9:00:50 PM
|
and...
before turning on auto-tuner:
wrkshrpool
is everything running out of *base and is there
adequate min/max for the pool? or, is the db
activity running in a shared pool?
you can see where it is running by doing:
wrkactjob F11
look for the pool ID
you might also run idoctor against the system
to get a clearer understanding of where the
performance troubles are coming from.
also, are you using toolkit or native driver for
sql access? this can impact performance too.
as for processors, there are 400 models that have
single processor (maybe this is a 270?) as well as
models that exceed 20+ processors.
-slugbug
|
Post #70,040
12/19/02 9:18:08 PM
|
*smile* Trust you
to be more thorough than I!
Imric's Tips for Living- Paranoia Is a Survival Trait
- Pessimists are never disappointed - but sometimes, if they are very lucky, they can be pleasantly surprised...
- Even though everyone is out to get you, it doesn't matter unless you let them win.
|
Post #70,139
12/20/02 3:15:55 PM
|
Thank you.
I will see if they let me check any of that the next time I'm in. Appreciate your efforts and suggestions. Knowing these guys, I should have prefaced my initial post with "I understand that any host is only as good as its Admin, but, ..." ;-)
This is all stuff they *know* to do, I suppose. But I'd bet not.
BTW, a friend of mine that works there just pinged me. He ran a Crystal Report based on a single query with one join. It was some numbers grouped by week over 3 months. The report took 19 hours to run. Now, I know his Sql could be really bad, but 19 hours? <:-O
|
