By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
438,756 Members | 1,760 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 438,756 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

DB2 Fixpak 9 now available for LUW

P: n/a
Also, noticed there is now a separate fixpak 9 for Linux 2.6 Kernel in
addition to the regular Linux fixpaks.
Nov 12 '05 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
20 Replies


P: n/a
unfortunately, it's labeled as fixpack 8 for the aix 5 version:
http://www-306.ibm.com/software/data...ownloadv8.html

any idea of how much of an impact the direct & concurrent io tempspaces
will have on warehousing apps?

buck

Nov 12 '05 #2

P: n/a
Can IBM explain why this is necessary, please?

Bruce

Buck Nuggets wrote:
unfortunately, it's labeled as fixpack 8 for the aix 5 version:
http://www-306.ibm.com/software/data...ownloadv8.html
any idea of how much of an impact the direct & concurrent io tempspaces will have on warehousing apps?

buck


Nov 12 '05 #3

P: n/a
bw********@yahoo.com wrote:
Can IBM explain why this is necessary, please?

Bruce

Buck Nuggets wrote:
unfortunately, it's labeled as fixpack 8 for the aix 5 version:


http://www-306.ibm.com/software/data...ownloadv8.html
any idea of how much of an impact the direct & concurrent io


tempspaces
will have on warehousing apps?

buck


Are you referring to buck's question (which I can't answer) or the
obvious typo (which I have reported)?

Cheers
Serge
--
Serge Rielau
DB2 SQL Compiler Development
IBM Toronto Lab
Nov 12 '05 #4

P: n/a
I'm referring to the separate FP9 for Linux 2.6 kernals...this seems
very unusual. Will we be thread specific in the future?

Bruce

Nov 12 '05 #5

P: n/a
Perhaps there is maintenance specific for the Linux 2.6 kernel or
perhaps there is something about the Linux 2.6 kernel that requires
something in the fixpak install to be different. I don't think IBM would
go out of its way to have fixpaks that are thread specific if it wasn't
necessary. But perhaps Serge or Darin can find out more.

Larry Edelstein

bw********@yahoo.com wrote:
I'm referring to the separate FP9 for Linux 2.6 kernals...this seems
very unusual. Will we be thread specific in the future?

Bruce

Nov 12 '05 #6

P: n/a
<bw********@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:11**********************@g14g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
I'm referring to the separate FP9 for Linux 2.6 kernals...this seems
very unusual. Will we be thread specific in the future?

Bruce

The reason is to support asynchronous I/O and vector I/O performance
enhancements that are only available with the 2.6
kernel. I don't believe it is mandatory that you use the special fixpak for
2.6 kernel if you don't need the I/O enhancements (not 100% sure).

The enhancement is described in "New in this Release" section of the Release
Notes. However there is an errata in the FixPackReadme.txt that comes with
the Fixpack in section: "3.1.2 Correction to the Version 8.2.2 Release Notes
(Linux)."
..
Nov 12 '05 #7

P: n/a
bw********@yahoo.com wrote:
I'm referring to the separate FP9 for Linux 2.6 kernals...this seems
very unusual. Will we be thread specific in the future?


To take full advantage of the 2.6 kernel on x86 and x86-64 platforms,
we need to compile with a newer compiler. We can also remove checks
for the kernel level from the code - the fact DB2 doesn't crash on
startup implies we're on a 2.6 kernel, and can take advantage of
certain features.

DB2 will continue to be kernel-specific on these platforms for the life
of version 8, so that we can continue to support RHEL3, SLES8, and
other distributions that were supported at the GA of v8.2 (or v8.1).

I cannot speak to what future versions of DB2 will be like.
Nov 12 '05 #8

P: n/a
I would definitely like to know if this is mandatory or not...I'd hate
to install the standard FP9 with our 2.6 kernal only to find out the
hard-way that the special FP9 for 2.6 was required.

Thanks guys,

Bruce

Mark A wrote:
<bw********@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:11**********************@g14g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
I'm referring to the separate FP9 for Linux 2.6 kernals...this seems very unusual. Will we be thread specific in the future?

Bruce
The reason is to support asynchronous I/O and vector I/O performance
enhancements that are only available with the 2.6
kernel. I don't believe it is mandatory that you use the special

fixpak for 2.6 kernel if you don't need the I/O enhancements (not 100% sure).

The enhancement is described in "New in this Release" section of the Release Notes. However there is an errata in the FixPackReadme.txt that comes with the Fixpack in section: "3.1.2 Correction to the Version 8.2.2 Release Notes (Linux)."
.


Nov 12 '05 #9

P: n/a
Larry wrote:
Perhaps there is maintenance specific for the Linux 2.6 kernel or
perhaps there is something about the Linux 2.6 kernel that requires
something in the fixpak install to be different. I don't think IBM would
go out of its way to have fixpaks that are thread specific if it wasn't
necessary. But perhaps Serge or Darin can find out more.

Larry Edelstein

bw********@yahoo.com wrote:
I'm referring to the separate FP9 for Linux 2.6 kernals...this seems
very unusual. Will we be thread specific in the future?

Bruce

This will likely continue into the future. From what I understand the
main issue is the "gcc ABI" (I'm parrotting I confess). To have a stream
that specifically exploit 2.6 features is a pleasant side-effect.

Cheers
Serge
--
Serge Rielau
DB2 SQL Compiler Development
IBM Toronto Lab
Nov 12 '05 #10

P: n/a
I agree it is always nice to exploit 2.6 features...but will I be in
trouble if I do not apply the 2.6 FP9 to a Linux 2.6 installation?

If there is trouble then I hope the support center has been trained to
spot the error!

Nov 12 '05 #11

P: n/a
bw********@yahoo.com wrote:
I agree it is always nice to exploit 2.6 features...but will I be in
trouble if I do not apply the 2.6 FP9 to a Linux 2.6 installation?

If there is trouble then I hope the support center has been trained to
spot the error!

My gut feeling is that it's wise to go with that FP if you use the 2.6
Kernel. I doubt that the 2.4 install will be tested as thoroughly
against 2.6 as the 2.6 install...

Cheers
Serge
--
Serge Rielau
DB2 SQL Compiler Development
IBM Toronto Lab
Nov 12 '05 #12

P: n/a
Serge -

I agree. My point here I guess is that I personally didn't see the
2.6-specific FP9 release until I saw it mentioned here on the board and
I bet others may not see it as well, this evidently being the
first-time for a thread-specific release. I'll know next time to look
for it but this first time might cause some angst amongst folks.

-B

Nov 12 '05 #13

P: n/a
<bw********@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:11**********************@o13g2000cwo.googlegr oups.com...
Serge -

I agree. My point here I guess is that I personally didn't see the
2.6-specific FP9 release until I saw it mentioned here on the board and
I bet others may not see it as well, this evidently being the
first-time for a thread-specific release. I'll know next time to look
for it but this first time might cause some angst amongst folks.

-B

Hi Bruce,

It was mentioned in the FixPackReadme.txt file.
Nov 12 '05 #14

P: n/a
bw********@yahoo.com wrote:
I would definitely like to know if this is mandatory or not...I'd hate
to install the standard FP9 with our 2.6 kernal only to find out the
hard-way that the special FP9 for 2.6 was required.

Thanks guys,

Bruce


The 2.4-kernel-based fixpak should not permit an install on a 2.6
kernel system (on x86 and x86-64 only). Thus, if you use
installFixPak, you should already be protected.

Thus, yes, it is mandatory.
Nov 12 '05 #15

P: n/a
Mark A wrote:
Also, noticed there is now a separate fixpak 9 for Linux 2.6 Kernel in
addition to the regular Linux fixpaks.


And why doesn't this one come in 64bit?

-R-
Nov 12 '05 #16

P: n/a
"Jurgen Haan" <ju****@fake.dom> wrote in message
news:42*********************@news.xs4all.nl...
Mark A wrote:
Also, noticed there is now a separate fixpak 9 for Linux 2.6 Kernel in
addition to the regular Linux fixpaks.


And why doesn't this one come in 64bit?

-R-


There is one for AMD 64-bit, but not Intel 64-bit.
Nov 12 '05 #17

P: n/a
Mark A wrote:
"Jurgen Haan" <ju****@fake.dom> wrote in message
news:42*********************@news.xs4all.nl...
Mark A wrote:
Also, noticed there is now a separate fixpak 9 for Linux 2.6 Kernel in
addition to the regular Linux fixpaks.


And why doesn't this one come in 64bit?

-R-

There is one for AMD 64-bit, but not Intel 64-bit.


An AMD 64bit 2.6 FP9? Didn't see it between the other FP.
Can you please tell me where I can find it?
(Running DB2 on an Opteron here :P)

-R-
Nov 12 '05 #18

P: n/a
"Jurgen Haan" <ju****@fake.dom> wrote in message
news:42*********************@news.xs4all.nl...
There is one for AMD 64-bit, but not Intel 64-bit.


An AMD 64bit 2.6 FP9? Didn't see it between the other FP.
Can you please tell me where I can find it?
(Running DB2 on an Opteron here :P)

-R-


http://www-306.ibm.com/software/data...ownloadv8.html
Nov 12 '05 #19

P: n/a
Mark A wrote:
"Jurgen Haan" <ju****@fake.dom> wrote in message
news:42*********************@news.xs4all.nl...
There is one for AMD 64-bit, but not Intel 64-bit.


An AMD 64bit 2.6 FP9? Didn't see it between the other FP.
Can you please tell me where I can find it?
(Running DB2 on an Opteron here :P)

-R-

http://www-306.ibm.com/software/data...ownloadv8.html


DOH! totally read over that one...
Thanks.

-R-
Nov 12 '05 #20

P: n/a
Buck Nuggets wrote:
unfortunately, it's labeled as fixpack 8 for the aix 5 version:
http://www-306.ibm.com/software/data...ownloadv8.html

any idea of how much of an impact the direct & concurrent io tempspaces
will have on warehousing apps?

buck

Typo should be fixed now. Tx for the notification.

--
Serge Rielau
DB2 SQL Compiler Development
IBM Toronto Lab
Nov 12 '05 #21

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.