DSXchange

rkashyap wrote:Large no of partitions (36) on the table may have adverse impact on performance.

I am experiencing adverse impact of such partitioning. I am planning to change it to same partitioning ans see how it performs. Will share the results once done.

Thanks rkashyap for your reply. From above reply it is pretty much clear now.

Hi Guys, I am trying to understand below job score. Environment Details - DataStage - 9.1.2 Oracle -- 11gR2 OS - Oracle Solaris Config File - 4 node Oracle connector Partition Type - Oracle Connector Write Mode - Insert Target table is partitioned by Range Method Job Detail -- DataSet ------ > Copy ...

Kept previous settings as it is and added Sort Stage with "Don't Sort (Previously Sorted)" set and It worked just fine.

Thanks Priyadarshi.

Tried 2nd option by 1) inserting a separate sort stage and setting "Don't Sort (Previously Sorted)" 2) removing previous setting of hash partitions and sorting 3) removing APT_NO_SORT_INSERTION but it dint give expected output. Orders of pivoted columns were incorrect for some of the rando...

This issue is resolved now. Even though hash partitioning and sorting were set up properly it was not behaving as per expectation. Issue Identification:- Upon observing dump score it was cleat that Vertical Pivot stage was inserting it's own 'tsort' operator which was only happening on KEY columns a...

Hash partitioning and sorting is done on Input Page of Pivot Enterprise Stage.

• Hash Partitioning - KEY (all key columns )
  Sorting - KEY (all key columns + SEQ).

Pivot Stage Properties:-

• GroupBy - KEY( All key columns )
  Pivot - SEQ and VALUE

I am trying to pivot rows to columns using Pivot Enterprise Stage (vertical Pivot) Somehow I am unable to execute successfully in parallel mode. Here is the detailed issue. I have mainly three columns KEY (bunch of group by columns) SEQ (values ranging 1 to 48 ) and VALUE (contains actual values - 4...

Hi Experts, 1)My question is whether it is possible to create a mirror image of the datastage env on a seperate Unix matchine to use for a limited time say 3 weeks, just like a disaster recovery mechanism? 2)In this scenario does Licencing based on CPUs be an issue? 3)If the IP and the hostname chan...

Hi ArndW
Considering the fact that we can only compare two servers' performances with identical data only, I have used the same Input and same Reference data for both servers.
Clearly, servers fair differently on the same load.

Oh sorry chullet, I referred to the ArndW comments earlier. Well chullet, in 'bitness' the servers are similar 64Bit. Infact in the same server I am now able to run this job completely with a EV "APT_LUTCREATE_MMAP = 1". This changes the way job uses the memory [Work arround]. Thus I suspe...

Yes, u are right. But my greater concern is that how can the same 7 Gb of data gets referenced in one server in same job and fails in another !!!

Strange.

Hi ArndW, Thanks, this is a very nice workaround. But I want the lookup stage to work in this case. This will also help me solve a bigger issue of this perticular server not performing well in case of jobs with lookup stage. This server performs slower than a server with less resources and very same...

Hi Rohit, THe database is Oracle. Data is over 9 million or around 7 Gb in the reference. The hardware architecture of both servers are not same. It is very strange that same jobs runs fine with same data/DB in a server with 2 CPU, 15 Gb Ram less space allocated to Scratch and Datasets. But is fails...

Hi, I did check the command "ulimit -a" from within a job. It gave me the same values. So how do we go further !!! shall I just increase the value more and try? JB_STG3_POD_REGISTRY_SAP_UPLOAD_10..BeforeJob (ExecSH): Executed command: ulimit -a *** Output from command was: *** time(seconds...