By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
438,226 Members | 1,027 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 438,226 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

Db2 v 8 is buggy

P: n/a
This sure looks like a troll, but IBM folks should go there
and defend DB2

http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...2708de1c07fd61

"
We're almost ready to give up on DB2 v8 and consider migration to
Oracle (the reason is DB2 v8 being unstable). The main question is -
how good and stable properly configured Oracle is under heavy OLTP load
(10M+ transactions/day)? DB2 v7 handles such loads nicely, but v8 even
w/FP7 is a disaster (instance crashes as well as other errors), and
with supported life of v7 coming to the end, we are pressured to look
for alternatives (with the only real one being Oracle).

So - does anybody has an experience (good or bad) with running heavily
loaded OLTP systems on Oracle?
"

As for those wondering why I am doing this, ask an indian friend of
yours "what is naarad muni".

Nov 12 '05 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
17 Replies


P: n/a
rkusenet wrote:
This sure looks like a troll, but IBM folks should go there
and defend DB2

http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...2708de1c07fd61

"
We're almost ready to give up on DB2 v8 and consider migration to
Oracle (the reason is DB2 v8 being unstable). The main question is -
how good and stable properly configured Oracle is under heavy OLTP load
(10M+ transactions/day)? DB2 v7 handles such loads nicely, but v8 even
w/FP7 is a disaster (instance crashes as well as other errors), and
with supported life of v7 coming to the end, we are pressured to look
for alternatives (with the only real one being Oracle).

So - does anybody has an experience (good or bad) with running heavily
loaded OLTP systems on Oracle?
"

As for those wondering why I am doing this, ask an indian friend of
yours "what is naarad muni".


Does DB2 need defending?

It doesn't seem appropriate to barge in on an Oracle group to 'defend'
DB2. If this guy has a problem with DB2 he could have turned to this
group. I am curious though to what is causing this behaviour (of DB2
that is :)) perhaps bugs in FP<=7 (I understand FP9 is a nescessity
because of major bugs in previous fixpaks).

-R-

-R-
Nov 12 '05 #2

P: n/a
"rkusenet" <us*******@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:3e************@individual.net...
"
We're almost ready to give up on DB2 v8 and consider migration to
Oracle (the reason is DB2 v8 being unstable). The main question is -
how good and stable properly configured Oracle is under heavy OLTP load
(10M+ transactions/day)? DB2 v7 handles such loads nicely, but v8 even
w/FP7 is a disaster (instance crashes as well as other errors), and
with supported life of v7 coming to the end, we are pressured to look
for alternatives (with the only real one being Oracle).

FP7 is the first release of 8.2 with many new features. So I would try FP9.
Nov 12 '05 #3

P: n/a
"rkusenet" <us*******@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:3e************@individual.net...
This sure looks like a troll, but IBM folks should go there
and defend DB2

http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...2708de1c07fd61

"

This person is trying to run 10M+ transactions per day on Windows 2003,
which is not the most stable OS. I would switch to Linux or UNIX, which are
very stable.
Nov 12 '05 #4

P: n/a
Mark A wrote:
"rkusenet" <us*******@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:3e************@individual.net...
This sure looks like a troll, but IBM folks should go there
and defend DB2

http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...2708de1c07fd61

"


This person is trying to run 10M+ transactions per day on Windows 2003,
which is not the most stable OS. I would switch to Linux or UNIX, which are
very stable.

Which is pretty much the same advise he got from the Oracle folks.

Cheers
Serge

--
Serge Rielau
DB2 SQL Compiler Development
IBM Toronto Lab
Nov 12 '05 #5

P: n/a
Perhaps, but OTOH, IBM didn't do much to actually test V8 FP7 before
releasing it on us as a FIX pack (more like a BREAK pack), and it is awfully
unreliable and there were no "do not use" warnings with FP7. FP8 fixes some
bugs, and we already have problems that "are scheduled to be resolved in
FP10". We're on 8.1.5 + private fixes in production.

I do agree that an Oracle forum is not the place to complain about DB2
instability, but I do understand that the OP wants to know if he might be
better off with Oracle under the circumstances - V7 is end of life and the
"current" V8 is too buggy for real use.

"rkusenet" <us*******@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:3e************@individual.net...
This sure looks like a troll, but IBM folks should go there
and defend DB2

http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...2708de1c07fd61

"
We're almost ready to give up on DB2 v8 and consider migration to
Oracle (the reason is DB2 v8 being unstable). The main question is -
how good and stable properly configured Oracle is under heavy OLTP load
(10M+ transactions/day)? DB2 v7 handles such loads nicely, but v8 even
w/FP7 is a disaster (instance crashes as well as other errors), and
with supported life of v7 coming to the end, we are pressured to look
for alternatives (with the only real one being Oracle).

So - does anybody has an experience (good or bad) with running heavily
loaded OLTP systems on Oracle?
"

As for those wondering why I am doing this, ask an indian friend of
yours "what is naarad muni".

Nov 12 '05 #6

P: n/a
I should say so - 8 very unstable! Linux or win - no difference. Traps
is regular on all fixes. Before fixpack 9 we need restart productive
server every 3 days by memory leaks :-(. Now, I see, it's fixed - first
good news after ten months.

Many years ago when I migrated from sybase/mssql/oracle db2 was really
faster and stable (5.2, not 5.0). I compare with sybase and ms. Today
I don't known about another software but I see very poor quality for
db2. After 5.2 first stable version - 7.2. After 7.2 - first version 8
for me 8.2. fixpack 7 with regularly server restarts аnd nice "gluks"
like

select 'gluk',CHAR('') AS gluk from sysibm.sysdummy1
0 rows selected in 0.01 secs.

O. Yo! It's fixed by ibm without open pmr... Fantastic! It can be not
so complex for such company as ibm to register bugs directly from this
conf which, by the way, is specified on a site as the basic?

Nov 12 '05 #7

P: n/a
I am not trying to apologize for DB2 problems, but people have to use some
common sense. PF7 is the first release of 8.2 so you can be expect it to be
about as buggy as 8.1 base code. The decision as to whether FP7 would be
would be 8.2 rather than 9.1 is not solely based on the number of technical
changes to the code, rather it is usually based on marketing decisions (8.2
is free for license holders of 8.1, and 9.1 would cost extra).

Probably a good idea to wait for at least 2 fixpacks after a release level
for critical production work, so that would mean FP9 at a minimum, which is
2 fixpacks after 8.2 base code. Or just stay with FP6b until whenever you
are comfortable moving to 8.2.
Nov 12 '05 #8

P: n/a
I perfectly understand it. But version 8 was for me up to 7 fixpack
absolutely non-operable. Migration on 8 is necessary to us, but a part
of servers will work on 7 fp12 due current problems with 8. Support
servers with different versions is very difficult.
One time customer will simply replace a platform because it was
bothered with problems. Not the fact, that on other platform will be
better, but customer will not return any more.
IMHO,
Andy

Nov 12 '05 #9

P: n/a
>>I perfectly understand it. But version 8 was for me up to 7 fixpack
absolutely non-operable. Migration on 8 is necessary to us, but a partof servers will work on 7 fp12 due current problems with 8.

My 2 cents...

I have to agree with Mark A on this one. We are running a
multi-terabyte data warehouse on 8.1.5 (and have been for quite some
time) with rock-solid stability. We have had VERY few problems and no
major outages (knock wood). We have held off on the move to 8.2 due to
the number of new features and normal caution but are building out a
test server at FP 9 and expect it to be reasonable solid. If not, we'll
wait for FP10.

Would be curious how many open PMRs you have with pre-FP7 issues...

Pete H

Nov 12 '05 #10

P: n/a
And I know of 2 customers who have been running with excellent stability
for many months on DB2 V8 fp6 and DB2 V8 fp5.

Larry Edelstein

peteh wrote:
I perfectly understand it. But version 8 was for me up to 7 fixpack
absolutely non-operable. Migration on 8 is necessary to us, but a
part
of servers will work on 7 fp12 due current problems with 8.


My 2 cents...

I have to agree with Mark A on this one. We are running a
multi-terabyte data warehouse on 8.1.5 (and have been for quite some
time) with rock-solid stability. We have had VERY few problems and no
major outages (knock wood). We have held off on the move to 8.2 due to
the number of new features and normal caution but are building out a
test server at FP 9 and expect it to be reasonable solid. If not, we'll
wait for FP10.

Would be curious how many open PMRs you have with pre-FP7 issues...

Pete H

Nov 12 '05 #11

P: n/a
> If this guy has a problem with DB2 he could have turned to this group
You didn't get it - it's DB2 who has a problem, not me. Guys from DB2
had confirmed the problem as a new one and are working on fix, so it
was not fixed in FP9 and it is not a Windows problem either (so it
could easily be within those 10% of DB2 Windows-specific code). Also I
really doubt that this group could provide us with code fix for DB2
(and if I would like to get a recommendation to install the latest FP,
I could ask L1 support).
FP9 is a nescessity because of major bugs in previous fixpaks

....and v7 was rock-solid starting @ FP3.

Nov 12 '05 #12

P: n/a
And I know of 1 customer who experienced persistent stability problems
with all v8 fixpaks from FP3 to FP8 inclusive. Instance crash is a bad
enough thing, you know (and difficult to blame on DBAs BTW). At the
same time v7 was rock-solid on the same kind of loads.

Nov 12 '05 #13

P: n/a
>>Would be curious how many open PMRs you have with pre-FP7 issues...
From a prior post, can you provide ANY substantiation for your

experience? Pretty easy to be bitter. A little more difficult to
quantify where your bitterness comes from and how much is
self-inflicted vs. "the vendor's fault". Just an observation...

Pete H

Nov 12 '05 #14

P: n/a
peteh wrote:
I have to agree with Mark A on this one. We are running a
multi-terabyte data warehouse on 8.1.5 (and have been for quite some
time) with rock-solid stability. We have had VERY few problems and no
major outages (knock wood). We have held off on the move to 8.2 due to the number of new features and normal caution but are building out a
test server at FP 9 and expect it to be reasonable solid. If not, we'll wait for FP10.


I've got similar experience: large data warehouse and three marts all
on 8.2.1 now. Everything is working fine, never had any problems with
*any* db2 v8 versions (8.1.0, 8.1.4, 8.1.5, 8.1.7a, 8.2.1).

On the transactional side we did have memory leaks with 8.1.0 & 8.1.4.
Never opened a PMR, just waited it out, and eventually 8.1.5 fixed it.

Of course, we stick with core db2 functionality - in my experience and
from looking at the pmrs, it appears that most problems are with all
the add-ons (xml extender, spatial components, federation, replication,
rotten cpu-eating fault-control-monitor, health center, etc).

buck

Nov 12 '05 #15

P: n/a
"Buck Nuggets" <bu*********@yahoo.com> a écrit dans le message de
news:11*********************@g47g2000cwa.googlegro ups.com...
peteh wrote:
I have to agree with Mark A on this one. We are running a
multi-terabyte data warehouse on 8.1.5 (and have been for quite some
time) with rock-solid stability. We have had VERY few problems and no
major outages (knock wood). We have held off on the move to 8.2 due

to
the number of new features and normal caution but are building out a
test server at FP 9 and expect it to be reasonable solid. If not,

we'll
wait for FP10.


I've got similar experience: large data warehouse and three marts all
on 8.2.1 now. Everything is working fine, never had any problems with
*any* db2 v8 versions (8.1.0, 8.1.4, 8.1.5, 8.1.7a, 8.2.1).

On the transactional side we did have memory leaks with 8.1.0 & 8.1.4.
Never opened a PMR, just waited it out, and eventually 8.1.5 fixed it.

Of course, we stick with core db2 functionality - in my experience and
from looking at the pmrs, it appears that most problems are with all
the add-ons (xml extender, spatial components, federation, replication,
rotten cpu-eating fault-control-monitor, health center, etc).

buck


I have a customer that runs a 1.6 TB db in DPF on Aix 5.1; migrated from
version 7.2 FP10 to V8.2 FP7a. Migration ran without any problem. No
instance crash in Production so far. I have other customers who migrated to
V8.2 FP8 OLTP contexts, and everything is running fine.

I agree with Buck that aside the core DB2 you can have find some problems;
but most likely affecting pre-production or development, like the db2advise
crashes the instance (fixed in FP9).

Now, I encourage everyone to test and apply the latest fixpacks and do not
hesitate to open PMRs when you encounter a behaviour that does not seem
normal. That's the best way to get things under control. And I do get
attention from the labs.

The only thing I would like them to do is proceed PMRs a little faster ...

Jean-Marc


Nov 12 '05 #16

P: n/a
db******@yahoo.com wrote:
If this guy has a problem with DB2 he could have turned to this group
You didn't get it - it's DB2 who has a problem, not me.


Sorry if you misunderstood me.
I didn't mean it like: 'do you have a problem dude??? Because surely DB2
can't have any problems.'
I meant it more like: are you experiencing any problems with DB2 (I'm
not native english, so I could say a thing meaning it in another context).

So I meant it like: If this guy is experiencing any problem with DB2, so
DB2 isn't acting like it should, he could have turned to this group.
Guys from DB2 had confirmed the problem as a new one and are working on fix, so it
was not fixed in FP9 and it is not a Windows problem either (so it
could easily be within those 10% of DB2 Windows-specific code). Also I
really doubt that this group could provide us with code fix for DB2
(and if I would like to get a recommendation to install the latest FP,
I could ask L1 support).
There are some developers here, so there might have been a slight change
of getting an useful answer here. (note the slight part)
FP9 is a nescessity because of major bugs in previous fixpaks


...and v7 was rock-solid starting @ FP3.


Again: I didn't mean to flame. I can understand the severity of the
problem, I meant it as a serious post. I hope the problem gets fixed soon.

-R-
Nov 12 '05 #17

P: n/a
isn't Windows (which is his platform) and heavy OLTP load an
oxymoron?

(Not that the Java GUI isn't buggy. That's the opposite of an
oxymoron).

On Tue, 17 May 2005 05:38:16 -0400, "rkusenet" <us*******@gmail.com>
wrote:
This sure looks like a troll, but IBM folks should go there
and defend DB2

http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...2708de1c07fd61

"
We're almost ready to give up on DB2 v8 and consider migration to
Oracle (the reason is DB2 v8 being unstable). The main question is -
how good and stable properly configured Oracle is under heavy OLTP load
(10M+ transactions/day)? DB2 v7 handles such loads nicely, but v8 even
w/FP7 is a disaster (instance crashes as well as other errors), and
with supported life of v7 coming to the end, we are pressured to look
for alternatives (with the only real one being Oracle).

So - does anybody has an experience (good or bad) with running heavily
loaded OLTP systems on Oracle?
"

As for those wondering why I am doing this, ask an indian friend of
yours "what is naarad muni".


Nov 12 '05 #18

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.