![]() | |
![]() |
| | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
| |||
| |||
|
#2
| |||
| |||
|
|
using sql 2k! I run a DTS job every night to load a table called "MISC" that brings over 30 millions records in the database A in server A. The job is taking over 5 hours. The probelm is the # of records are keep increasing. I am trying to minimizing the total execution time. Is that all possible? This is what I have: The job truncates the table "MISC" first, drop indexes, do import (thru DTS) and recreate indexes. The DTS package has two data pumps and this is the sequence: serverB------> server A --------->(complete(blue)--------> server C-------> server A please note: server B and C are source servers (sql servers 2k). server A is a destination sever. I am using "complete" workflow when the import from B to A completes. (can not do parallel bc the destination table is same) The "fast load" and "tab lock" options are turned on but I am not using "batch size" option. currently it is set to 0. should I use it (inset a value in it) for improving performance? how does it work? what are other ways to minimize the total execution time? in the database properties, the "autoshrink" option is off and the recovery model is set to "simple". thanks for your help! *** Sent via Developersdex http://www.developersdex.com *** Don't just participate in USENET...get rewarded for it! |
#3
| |||
| |||
|
#4
| |||
| |||
|
|
Allan, Thanks for your reply! I understand 2 data pumps tasks you described but doesn't there is "completion" precedence in between them. I mean doesn't server C to A task has to complete first before server B to C start?. If not, then it would be parallel inst it? would it be possible in my situation when both tasks are writing to a same table? (if it goes parallel, that would be great) I'll also try with turning 'fast load' option off to see how it goes. I am already complying these: 1. Setting the DB to Simple recovery 2. Make sure there are no indexes on the destination 3. Make sure there are no triggers on the destination. Ideally, I like to identify the records that have changed and move only those without truncating the table and loads it. thats the best option. but I've never done anything like this (using triggers) before. is there any example out there? thanks for your help!!! *** Sent via Developersdex http://www.developersdex.com *** Don't just participate in USENET...get rewarded for it! |
#5
| |||
| |||
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |