Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
Database Servers
DB2InformixIngresMS SQLOraclePervasive.SQLPostgreSQLProgressSybase
Desktop Databases
FileMakerFoxProMS AccessParadox
General
General DB TopicsDatabase Theory
Related Topics
Java Development.NET DevelopmentVB DevelopmentMore Topics ...

Database Forum / DB2 Topics / June 2005

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Confused over data page utilization

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
fraffin@gmail.com - 29 Jun 2005 18:42 GMT
I've tried this post on the listserv with little or no results.
Hopefully someone can clear this confusion up for me.

I've got a situation that has me somewhat befuddled.  I have three
tables all with approximately 600,000 records.  Here are some
statistics
concerning the three tables:

tblname     rows     pages           avg. rows/pg    rowsz in bytes

tab1        599928    18772           31.95866    1000
tab2           601006    100265         5.994175     630
tab3        601007    2377           252.8427     37

All tables are in a single 32k DMS tablespace(please don't go there,
that's a
topic for another discussion).  There are hundreds of additional tables
in the same tablespace.  I'm only using these three tables as an
example.  Obviously I've done my own math to get the average rows/pg.
What I don't understand is tab2 taking 100,000+ pages at approximately
6 rows/pg.  Indexes are in there own tablespaces. Pctfree is not set.
I've done a reorg check on all of the above tables.  No reorgs
recommended.  I did reorgs anyway and no significant change.

Someone please tell me the important point that am I missing?  It
just doesn't make sense to me.
Matt Emmerton - 30 Jun 2005 05:09 GMT
> I've tried this post on the listserv with little or no results.
> Hopefully someone can clear this confusion up for me.
[quoted text clipped - 22 lines]
> Someone please tell me the important point that am I missing?  It
> just doesn't make sense to me.

How are you computing the "rowsz in bytes"?  Depending on what types you're
using (CHAR vs VARCHAR, for example), there may be more bytes allocated on
disk than you think.

--
Matt Emmerton
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.