Unanswered: Are loopback proxy tables a viable option for heavy use
We are currently migrating from a PowerBuilder and Coldfusion base application to JAVA, and are refactoring the database where needed. In doing so we are running the new JAVA app against a new database on the same server. Our initial plan was to migrate the data to the new database and replace the legacy tables with views that pointed to the new tables. Performance was bad, so we tried loopback proxy tables that were based on views to the new tables. The i/os returned to around what we had before the migration. So far we have only tried it on code tables that are fairly small static, and have not tried it on larger and more dynamic tables. The proxy tables worked great in our testing, but we had issues with syslogs in sybsystemdb and master filling up. Yesterday we noticed that truncate log on checkpoint was not enabled on sybsystemdb so we enabled it.
The problem appears to have gone away, but the question is, will using 100's of proxy tables work for our migration, or are there other issues that will arise and make it so we cannot extesively use proxy tables to allow the legacy system to continue to work while slowly replacing it's functionality with the new application in a seperate database?
I am primarily an application DBA who is trying to work with our server DBAs get this all working correctly. Our system is the biggest in our organization with over 1500 tables in our primary legacy database. We are continuing to test it, but this is for an organization with limited budget (in tough economic times), and the legacy application needs to continue to run while it is slowly replaced with the new applcation. We are currently running ASE 15.0.3.
Mike AKA kayakbuilder
Last edited by kayakbuilder; 02-17-12 at 14:43.
Reason: Additional info added