lerwick
Member
Hi,
We have the following setup
B7332 Coexistance, database on AS400 9406-S30; NT applications server, and
Citrix, running mainly Financials and Job Cost.
About 70 concurrent world users and the same for OW.
In OneWorld everything seems a bit slower than World. In World I can
quantity this with response time figures from AS400 performance monitor.
Performance monitor doesn't report any response time figures for the SQL
requests from OW though so I can't easily see what the response time is. I
am wondering how people using AS400's, or even anyone using OW are
measuring response time? It used to be so easy with World using performance
monitor!
I started off looking at the difference between a job status inquiry in
World and OW and found that in World it took about 15 seconds, and in OW it
took about 5 minutes. So far using DBMON and job logs I have found that
World uses a permanent join file for the query and OW creates a hash table
during the inquiry. I was going to look at creating a LF as per the job log
to see if that speeds up the transaction. Maybe I need to get the OW code
changed as well to use the same join file as World? At least I understood
why it was slower after finding out it was completing the query in
different ways.
Another odd thing seemed to happen when I sent the SQL statement using
Operations Navigator - the same query that took about 5 minutes in OW
completed in about 1 minute through operations navigator. The SQL package
and job log showed the SQL optimiser was creating a hash table in OW and a
creating a logical file through Ops Nav SQL. I haven't figured out why the
optimiser behaves differently when the same SQL statement arrives either
way.
thanks for any thoughts,
Lerwick Harding
Alstom NZ
We have the following setup
B7332 Coexistance, database on AS400 9406-S30; NT applications server, and
Citrix, running mainly Financials and Job Cost.
About 70 concurrent world users and the same for OW.
In OneWorld everything seems a bit slower than World. In World I can
quantity this with response time figures from AS400 performance monitor.
Performance monitor doesn't report any response time figures for the SQL
requests from OW though so I can't easily see what the response time is. I
am wondering how people using AS400's, or even anyone using OW are
measuring response time? It used to be so easy with World using performance
monitor!
I started off looking at the difference between a job status inquiry in
World and OW and found that in World it took about 15 seconds, and in OW it
took about 5 minutes. So far using DBMON and job logs I have found that
World uses a permanent join file for the query and OW creates a hash table
during the inquiry. I was going to look at creating a LF as per the job log
to see if that speeds up the transaction. Maybe I need to get the OW code
changed as well to use the same join file as World? At least I understood
why it was slower after finding out it was completing the query in
different ways.
Another odd thing seemed to happen when I sent the SQL statement using
Operations Navigator - the same query that took about 5 minutes in OW
completed in about 1 minute through operations navigator. The SQL package
and job log showed the SQL optimiser was creating a hash table in OW and a
creating a logical file through Ops Nav SQL. I haven't figured out why the
optimiser behaves differently when the same SQL statement arrives either
way.
thanks for any thoughts,
Lerwick Harding
Alstom NZ