552 DB2 II: Performance Monitoring, Tuning and Capacity Planning Guide
Type: Table
Time of creation: 2004-06-04-07.02.15.736633
Last statistics update: 2004-06-09-23.20.10.138687
Number of columns: 9
Number of rows: 10003789
Width of rows: 115
Number of buffer pool pages: 296184
Distinct row values: No
Tablespace name: DATA_TS
Tablespace overhead: 9.500000
Tablespace transfer rate: 0.900000
Source for statistics: Single Node
Prefetch page count: 48
Container extent page count: 16
Table overflow record count: 0
Table Active Blocks: -1
Access plan description
The access plan graph for our SQL query has been highlighted in Example B-10
on page 516 under “Access Plan”.
Reading this graph bottom up reveals a significant difference in the access plan
for the same query when a fenced wrapper is used:
The directed table queue operator (DTQ operator 2) indicates that a nested
loop join (NLJOIN operator 3) of the orders table and customer table occurs in
parallel on individual partitions, and the combined result of the rows
(2.27853e+07) from the individual partitions (7.5951e+06) is directed to the
coordinator partition and the RETURN operator 1.
As in the previous trusted wrapper scenario, the bottom left part of the graph
indicates that the ORA.CUSTOMER nickname has 1.5 million rows according
to the DB2 II catalog statistics, and that all these rows are processed by the
SHIP operator 5.
The BTQ operator 4 represents the distribution of remote data from the fmp
process of the fenced wrapper to the db2agntp processes that were created
in each of the partitions for accessing the TPCD.ORDERS table.
The 1.5e+06 rows from the SHIP operator 5 will be the outer table (see
Arguments of the BTQ operator 4) of a nested loop join (NLJOIN operator 3)
with the orders table. The inner table of this nested loop join is estimated to
return 5.0634 rows, and the result of the nested loop join is estimated to be
7.5951e+06 rows.
The 5.0634 rows for the inner table of the nested loop join are formed from a
series of operator executions involving a IXSCAN (operator 10), SORT
(operator 9), RIDSCN (operator 8), and FETCH (operator 7). We have not