If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

 
Go Back  dBforums > Database Server Software > DB2 > DirectI/0 Vs Devices.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 08-29-07, 09:30
dba_udb dba_udb is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 73
DirectI/0 Vs Devices.

All-
I would like to know the advantage of having File containers with Direct I/o over a device containers.

some of our systems built by IBM and they proeferred a file containers over devices and they claim that Direct I/o feature made file containers better than device containers.

Is any one having experience with Direct I/O File containers and is it really better than Device containers.

please share your ideas.

thanks
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 08-29-07, 10:05
dbamota dbamota is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 237
File containers are easy to create and manipulate(copy, expand etc.). With file containers I/O is done from disk to OS file cache and then from OS file cache to bufferpool. With direct I/O (as with device)data goes from disk to bufferpool. For the same memory on a system you can use bigger bufferpools and smaller OS file cache in Direct I/O or device(raw) containers making the sytem more efficient. With Direct I/O, You get the convenience of the file system with the efficiency of device container. You have to adjust the OS parameters.
__________________
mota
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 08-30-07, 11:57
dba_udb dba_udb is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 73
Thank you DBA MOTA. I know the differences . But what do you think is the best between these , Before DIO , CIO -- devices are easily better than Files.

what about now. Does devices still performing better than File containers with DIO and CIO..

thanks
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 08-31-07, 00:47
Marcus_A Marcus_A is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 5,196
Unless most of SQL statements are doing table scans on large tables, it will not make any difference.
__________________
M. A. Feldman
IBM Certified DBA on DB2 for Linux, UNIX, and Windows
IBM Certified DBA on DB2 for z/OS and OS/390
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 08-31-07, 06:29
stolze stolze is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Jena, Germany
Posts: 2,662
If you have BLOB data (on LUW), you want to use file-based containers and activate file system caching for those. For everything you don't want to have the OS apply an additional caching layer. That's all I would worry about because it will be really hard for you to measure any differences between the types - as Marcus_A said. (And if you have lots of table scans, you have other mechanisms to improve performance first.)
__________________
Knut Stolze
IBM DB2 Analytics Accelerator
IBM Germany Research & Development
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On