DB2 - Problembeschreibung
Problem IT10651 | Status: Geschlossen |
RDC: PERF: THROUGHPUT VERY LOW (98% DEGRADED) WHEN DIAGLEVEL IS 4 | |
Produkt: | |
DB2 FOR LUW / DB2FORLUW / 970 - DB2 | |
Problembeschreibung: | |
Setting dbm cfg param diaglevel to 4 is expected to have worse performance than diaglevel 3, but the performance in v98fp3 diaglevel 4 resembles that of an nbuild and is very very low. There is a message that is dumped to db2diag.log very frequently: 2010-10-26-15.53.24.315615-240 I3145388E547 LEVEL: Info PID : 25191 TID : 46916826032448 PROC : db2sysc INSTANCE: aaa NODE : 000 DB : DTW APPHDL : 0-69 APPID: *LOCAL.aaa.101026195321 AUTHID : AAA EDUID : 80 EDUNAME: db2agent (AAA) FUNCTION: DB2 UDB, trace services, sqlt_logerr_data (secondary logging function), probe:50 MESSAGE : DEBUG: javaDebug init DATA #1 : Hexdump, 1 bytes 0x00002AABACBEF1FB : 00 I created a gbuild which comments out this line in /vbs/engn/sqri/sqlriudf.C : sqlt_logerr_data("DEBUG: javaDebug init", &fmpParms.javaDebug, sizeof(fmpParms.javaDebug), SQLT_FFSL_INF); The performance of my gbuild in diaglevel 4 is very close to our nightly runs which run at diaglevel 3. So vanilla s101021 had a TPS of 27.59 (run number lnx05_7741) as opposed to my gbuild's TPS of 2338.2 (run number lnx05_7739) Is this message important to be dumped to db2diag.log or can it be logged less frequently or removed altogether? | |
Problem-Zusammenfassung: | |
**************************************************************** * USERS AFFECTED: * * NA * **************************************************************** * PROBLEM DESCRIPTION: * * See Error Description * **************************************************************** * RECOMMENDATION: * * Change diaglevel to 3 * **************************************************************** | |
Local-Fix: | |
Change diaglevel to 3 | |
Lösung | |
NA | |
Workaround | |
keiner bekannt / siehe Local-Fix | |
Weitere Daten | |
Datum - Problem gemeldet : Datum - Problem geschlossen : Datum - der letzten Änderung: | 12.08.2015 05.11.2015 05.11.2015 |
Problem behoben ab folgender Versionen (IBM BugInfos) | |
Problem behoben lt. FixList in der Version | |
9.7.0.11 |