Muhammad,
Some information as I know it with regards to the Native and ToolKit
drivers. Not that Native vs. Toolkit is your issue but it does
highlight some of the impacts of which driver is being used.
When connecting to a remote database, different architectures are used
between the two. The Native JDBC Driver will use CLI (call level
interface) to communicate with a QSQSRVR job on the origination iseries
(application). The QSQSRVR job will communicate with the target box via
DRDA (distributed relational database architecture). The DRDA
connection will create a QRWTSRVR job on the target box to fetch the
data from the DB2 database. The data is then sent back through the same
process but in reverse order.
The IBM Toolbox for Java JDBC Driver will use the optimized database
host server to attach to a QZDASOINIT prestart job on the origination
box. The QZDASOINIT job will will communicate with the target box via
the optimized database host server on the target box. The database host
server will attach to a QZDASOINIT prestart to fetch the data from the
DB2 database. The data is then sent back through the same process but
in reverse order.
The difference is in the use of the DRDA architecture with the Native
JDBC Driver compared to the use of the optimized Database Host server
with the Toolbox Driver. As I understand it, IBM recommends the use of
the IBM Toolbox for Java JDBC Driver because it was built specifically
for communicating with the iSeries DB2 Database remotely. The optimized
database host server is tailored for remote data access. All-in-all;
reliability, performance, and functionality differeniates the IBM
Toolbox for Java JDBC Driver from the Native JDBC Driver.
Someone may want to argue with me on some of these claims but I think
they are generally pretty true.
But, you should also check on the QSQSRVR and QZDASOINIT prestart job
settings depending on how your driver is functioning.
Michael Crump
Manager, Computing Services
Saint-Gobain Containers, Inc.
1509 S. Macedonia Ave.
Muncie, IN 47302
765.741.7696
765.741.7012 f
Change
When the winds of change blow hard enough, the most trivial of things
can turn into deadly projectiles.
This email and its attachments may be confidential and are intended
solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any views
or opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not
necessarily represent those of Saint-Gobain. If it did, it would be
folded, mutilated, watered down, politically corrected, and would show
up a week later if at all. If you are not the intended recipient of
this email and its attachments, you must take no action based upon them,
nor must you copy or show them to anyone.
Please contact the sender if you believe you have received this email in
error.
-----Original Message-----
From: java400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[
mailto:java400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Muhammad Owais
Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2007 4:34 AM
To: java400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: java400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Performance Issue
Hello;
I have migtated my EJB1.1 application from WebSphere 3.5 to WebSphere
5.1. When I deployed the application on a PC based server that uses
database from AS400, it is very slow. Additionally before migration we
have optimized the queries. Moreover we have upgraded the RAM from 1GB
to 4GB, expecting the performance improvement. Queries execute fine on
Windows based DB2 with 2GB of RAM but on AS400 machine the same queries
completes in a longer time. Furthermore we have also altered the
Machine, Base, Spool and Interactive memory.
Please guide me in optimizing the queries on AS400 DB.
Thanking you in anticipation.
With regards
Allah Hafiz
Muhammad Owais Bilal Awan,
+923002171163
midrange.com
