DB2 - Problem description
Problem IC66098 | Status: Closed |
COMPRESSION RATIO VALUE IN SYSCAT.INDEXES NOT VERY ACCURATE WHEN USING RANGE PARTITIONED TABLES AND PARTITIONED INDEXES | |
product: | |
DB2 FOR LUW / DB2FORLUW / 970 - DB2 | |
Problem description: | |
Enhance runstats to provide more accurate compression ratio information (stored in syscat.indexes) when dealing with range partitioned indexes with many sparsely populated partitions. When a large number of range partitions in an index are empty the overall compression ratio is lower than expected. However, if the sparsely populated ranges are eliminated from the calculation the compression ratio is more accurate. | |
Problem Summary: | |
**************************************************************** * USERS AFFECTED: * * Db2 9.7 FP1 and previous release * **************************************************************** * PROBLEM DESCRIPTION: * * When a large number of range partitions in an index * * areemptythe overall compression ratio islower than expected. * * However, if the sparsely populatedrangesare eliminated from * * thecalculation the compression ratio is more accurate. * **************************************************************** * RECOMMENDATION: * **************************************************************** | |
Local Fix: | |
available fix packs: | |
DB2 Version 9.7 Fix Pack 2 for Linux, UNIX, and Windows | |
Solution | |
Enhance runstats to provide more accurate compression ratio information (stored in syscat.indexes) when dealing with range partitioned indexes with many sparsely populated partitions. | |
Workaround | |
not known / see Local fix | |
Comment | |
syscat.indexes view information was improved to return a more accurate copression ratio information | |
BUG-Tracking | |
forerunner : APAR is sysrouted TO one or more of the following: IC67249 follow-up : | |
Timestamps | |
Date - problem reported : Date - problem closed : Date - last modified : | 04.02.2010 31.08.2010 31.08.2010 |
Problem solved at the following versions (IBM BugInfos) | |
Problem solved according to the fixlist(s) of the following version(s) | |
9.7.0.2 |