Karin,

I agree with Doug from a DBA's perspective. But increasing those parms may,
emphasize "may", be hiding poor programming and transaction management
techniques practiced by the application developers. More-frequent commits will
negate some of the need to increase the db config parms, and will increase data
sharing. Another possibility is to instruct your developers to "select with ur"
whenever possible. The upside is lock-free reading. The downside is the reading is dirty -
uncommitted transactions will be included in the result set. Another possibility is to
review the bind isolation level; not all transactions need the same isolation.
Ah, the life of a DBA....

Nick

-------------- Original message --------------
From: "Doug Kostelnik " <db2udbdba-ezmlmshield-x51840086.[Email address protected]

> I'd say that your locklist is probably woefully small. I have about
> 1500-2000 connections and have mine set to 1500 and my locks rarely
> escalate.
>
> The MAXLOCKS says to escalate the locking from row to table when the
> LOCKLIST hits (in your case) 60% for a specific transaction. By
> increasing the LOCKLIST size, you will (hopefully) reduce the amount of
> escalations.
>
> PS: More commits might also work, but no one has to change any code to
> make this change.
>
> Douglas Kostelnik
> Senior Database Administrator/Architect
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Karin Hilbert
> [mailto:db2udbdba-ezmlmshield-x16802749.[Email address protected]
> Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2007 11:05 AM
> To: LazyDBA Discussion
> Subject: ADM5502W The escalation of xxxx locks ... was successful
>
> We get several of these messages in our db2diag.log each day. Most
> of the lock intents are "S" and a few of them are "X". From the
> research that I've done on this warning, it seems that this is not a
> critical message, but could affect performance. And that the best
> solution would be for the applications people to check their
> applications and include more commits? Increasing the lock
> parameters, locklist and maxlocks would eliminate the messages, but
> would allow poor application design and therefore poor
> performance? The parameters are currently at:
> Max storage for lock list (4KB) (LOCKLIST) = 50
> Percent. of lock lists per application (MAXLOCKS) = 60
>
> Your thoughts would be appreciated.
>
> Karin Hilbert
> Systems Administrator/Integrator
> Administrative Information Services
> Pennsylvania State University
> 4 Shields Bldg., University Park, PA 16802
> 814-863-3633
> [Email address protected]
> AIS information: http://ais.its.psu.edu/
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> TO REPLY TO EVERBODY , PLEASE CLICK REPLY-ALL, NOT JUST REPLY
> To post a dba job: http://jobs.lazydba.com
> To Subscribe : http://www.LazyDBA.com
> To unsubscribe: http://www.lazydba.com/unsubscribe.html
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> The information transmitted is intended only for the person(s) or entity to
> which it is addressed
> and may contain confidential and or privileged material and should be treated as
> a confidential
> AAA Auto Club South communication. If the reader of this message is not the
> intended recipient, you
> are hereby notified that your access is unauthorized, and any review,
> dissemination,distribution, or
> copying of this message including any attachments is strictly prohibited.
> ========================================================================
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> TO REPLY TO EVERBODY , PLEASE CLICK REPLY-ALL, NOT JUST REPLY
> To post a dba job: http://jobs.lazydba.com
> To Subscribe : http://www.LazyDBA.com
> To unsubscribe: http://www.lazydba.com/unsubscribe.html
>

DB2 & UDB email list listserv db2-l LazyDBA home page