Journaling is a more complex solution and probably requires greater care and
monitoring (at least while the learning curve is in effect), but it ought to
perform better overall than triggers. It ought to have minimal to no impact
on your existing iSeries processing as well.
Celebrating 11-Years of SQL Performance Excellence on IBM i, i5/OS and
Subject: Re: Direction for Keeping Web DB up to date
One think that I failed to mention that may or may not affect your thoughts
is that the tables between the i5 side and MS SQL side are not 1 to 1.
There are cases where one row/column/table on the i5 side can apply to
multiple rows/columns/tables on the MS SQL side. And where multiple
rows/columns/tables on the i5 side apply to one row/column/table on the MS
SQL side. This is due to de-normalization and such on the web side to
improve performance and data availability.
I am also concerned with the performance hit between the two proposed
solutions. Since the programs (not including the actual trigger program)
used in the trigger solution are just batch jobs, I can control the
resources they get. That does not seem to be the case with journaling.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2019 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact