Hi,

I have to save some big texts into database. Now I have a table with column defined as CLOB with 10 MB. In that table is also some other columns, but are not problematic. In table is 300.000 rows which occupy 22 GB of disk space. Disk space is the problem. Would it be better to define VARCHAR field instread of CLOB? Would VARCHAR reduce the disk space used?

My system: DB2 v8 fp2 on Windows 2000

Thanks,
Grofaty

It would, but not significantly... you no longer need the LOB locator. I also think DB2 makes a better effort to "stuff" the page full with VARCHARs than LOBs (although someone would have to confirm that).

I found a very significant difference in INSERT and SELECT performance when using VARCHAR instead of LOB, presumably due to the bufferpool usage. VARCHARs are much faster to access. Of course, if your system is memory constrained, you could fill up the bufferpool with these large VARCHARs leaving little room for anything else... it's a balance.

Hi,

So LOB fields does not use bufferpool and VARCHAR fileds does?

Thanks,
Grofaty

Correct. (except LONG VARCHAR, it doesn't)

Hi,

J Petruk, thank you very much.

Thanks,
Grofaty