DB2 increase bufferpool size and compressed tables not equal better performance. Why?
Posted
by Mestika
on Stack Overflow
See other posts from Stack Overflow
or by Mestika
Published on 2010-05-19T09:47:45Z
Indexed on
2010/05/19
9:50 UTC
Read the original article
Hit count: 168
Hi,
I’m working on tuning and increasing the performance of my IBM DB2 version 9.7 database. I’ve been searching around the net for the last couple of days and learned that if I created my tables in COMPRESS mode and created one more bufferpool and set both of them to access 1024mb, then the performance in my queries should increase because of the less I/Os to the disks.
However, when I run my time analysis, the performance Decrease. I added the new additions to my regular database with the indexes I’ve used all the time. Each time I search google I come up with the statement that: Increased bufferpool size and several bufferpools AND a table compression SHOULD prove to get better performance.
I’m very puzzled about the total unexpected result. Are there some tuning mechanisms I’ve forgot or does anyone have a explanation for this odd behavior?
Sincerely
Mestika
© Stack Overflow or respective owner
