
Signature
Serge Rielau
DB2 Solutions Development
IBM Toronto Lab
IOD Conference
http://www.ibm.com/software/data/ondemandbusiness/conf2006/
> Jane,
>
[quoted text clipped - 15 lines]
> IOD Conference
> http://www.ibm.com/software/data/ondemandbusiness/conf2006/
Thanks, Serge.
Probably I did not explain my question clearly.
My environment is UDB V8 on AIX.
My concern is not table size limit. Because now I know the Max size
for the big table is 40GB. It is OK on single partition, even for 4K
page.
My concern is on query performance. I know if using multi-partition, it
must be resolved.
but the other tables are all very small, and the total DB size is not
big (50GB), based on the DB size, I want to use single partition
database. Only because of this big table to use multi-partiton , seems
a little bit waste..
That's why I want to break down the big table to relatively smaller
ones. Use union all view.
One of my colleague remind me this would change optimizer to not use
star schema to get good access plan..
(because currently , the big table is fact table, it is in star schema
model)
I'm not sure if this is the case..
Serge Rielau - 21 Aug 2006 21:30 GMT
Make your fact table a multi-dimensional-cluster.
That's ll do. I agree that DPF would be overkill.
If you don't have a low cardinality column that offers itself up for
MDC, just add another column e.g.
yearmonth GENERATED ALWAYS AS (INTEGER(date)/100)
Then cluster on the yearmonth column.
If you have 3 years worth of data this would partition the table into
3 * 12 => 36 slices.
Cheers
Serge

Signature
Serge Rielau
DB2 Solutions Development
IBM Toronto Lab
IOD Conference
http://www.ibm.com/software/data/ondemandbusiness/conf2006/
jane - 22 Aug 2006 01:11 GMT
> Make your fact table a multi-dimensional-cluster.
> That's ll do. I agree that DPF would be overkill.
[quoted text clipped - 15 lines]
> IOD Conference
> http://www.ibm.com/software/data/ondemandbusiness/conf2006/
Serge
Thanks a lot!
I did not realize I could use MDC...
sethwai@yahoo.com - 22 Aug 2006 14:16 GMT
Serge,
Your response brings up a question. How will the advantages of MDC
tables be leveraged when the clustering column is not related to the
actual data relationships and therefore will not be referenced in any
predicates?
Thanks.
Lew
> Make your fact table a multi-dimensional-cluster.
> That's ll do. I agree that DPF would be overkill.
[quoted text clipped - 15 lines]
> IOD Conference
> http://www.ibm.com/software/data/ondemandbusiness/conf2006/
Serge Rielau - 22 Aug 2006 14:49 GMT
> Your response brings up a question. How will the advantages of MDC
> tables be leveraged when the clustering column is not related to the
> actual data relationships and therefore will not be referenced in any
> predicates?
It won't. That's the same for UNION ALL, or range clustering.
If there is no way for the compiler or the run time engine to eliminate
ranges then its' useless.
If you are looking at parallelism note that SMP doesn't operate on a per
range level. Instead it will start reading all the ranges in all the
threads and sub divide within the range.
This is different from DPF where each node will read it's database
partition exclusively.
Cheers
Serge

Signature
Serge Rielau
DB2 Solutions Development
IBM Toronto Lab
IOD Conference
http://www.ibm.com/software/data/ondemandbusiness/conf2006/