Re: ontape vs onbar

-->Root, log log, phys log (3 x temp), one large application dbspace. i would create more dbspaces... one big dbspace will not be done in paralel. if this is impossible stick with onbar -b -w -L 0 it will do the critical first (maybe paralel ) and then the app dbspace so you will not get paralelism out of it like this... also look at the bar params in onconfig maybe BAR_NB_XPORT_COUNT 10 -------------------------------------^^^^ increasedependant on how much mem you have say 100 on 2 k systems make sure that: BAR_XFER_BUF_SIZE 31 also check ism for paralelism check manual!! eq /nsr/res/nsr/res -->> search for your dev and look for targetsessions. (not more then 4!! ) and ism_config -->> streams not more then 4.. Superboer.

"Superboer" <superboer7@planet.nl> wrote in message news:1123830503.185843.157390@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > -->Root, log log, phys log (3 x temp), one large application dbspace. > > i would create more dbspaces... one big dbspace will not be done in > paralel. Thanks. I take your point. But ontape doesn't do parallelism either and it's still twice as fast! I'd like to know why ... cheers Neil

Hello Neil, sorry do not know that suppose it less efficient compared to ontape since it has to communicate with ism. i assume all the logging etc is switched of?? eq BAR_DEBUG is 0 also try and play with BAR_NB_XPORT_COUNT that's all; maybe top/sar/iostat can sched more light on this. iostat should be able to tell you what the iosize is for what ism is doing... Superboer. Neil Truby schreef: > "Superboer" <superboer7@planet.nl> wrote in message > news:1123830503.185843.157390@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > > -->Root, log log, phys log (3 x temp), one large application dbspace. > > > > i would create more dbspaces... one big dbspace will not be done in > > paralel. > > > Thanks. > > I take your point. But ontape doesn't do parallelism either and it's still > twice as fast! I'd like to know why ... > > cheers > > Neil