Module: Collaborative Application Architectures Project GCC09: Performance analysis in hybrid data s

1
Module Collaborative Application
ArchitecturesProject GCC09Performance
analysis in hybrid data structures

• Presented by
• Michael Brockmann
• Maik Hölter
• Olaf Reimann

2
Agenda

• Introduction
• Project problems
• Business scenario Maintenance
• Business scenario Working hours assignment
• Results
• Business scenario Employee management
• Results
• Conclusion

2/16
3
Project team

• Michael Brockmann, Student of Business Computing,
  7th Semester
• Maik Hölter, Student of Business Computing, 7th
  Semester
• Olaf Reimann, Student of Business Computing, 7th
  Semester

• Introduction
• Project problems
• Maintenance
• Working hrs. assignment
• Results
• Employee management
• Results
• Conclusion

3/16
4
Project goal

• Performance tests in developed business scenarios
  based on known weak spots of NSF, considered ones
  are
• Index building
• Time/date-views
• Readers-fields
• Data of two or more databases aggregated in
• one view
• Possible workaround with NSFDB2

• Introduction
• Project problems
• Maintenance
• Working hrs. assignment
• Results
• Employee management
• Results
• Conclusion

4/16
5
NSFDB2 in IBM Lotus Notes/Domino 7

• With release 7 Domino uses DB2 as an alternate
  data store for Notes data
• Specific sets of data are pushed from NSF to DB2
  in form of DB2 Access Views
• A Notes view can be built based on a SQL query in
  form of QueryViews
• Notes data is stored as a BLOB in DB2

• Introduction
• Project problems
• Maintenance
• Working hrs. assignment
• Results
• Employee management
• Results
• Conclusion

5/16
6
Domino Server.Load

• Domino Server.Load is included as part of the
  Administrator Client
• You can run a script (a simulated workload) in
  your own environment to obtain server capacity
  and response metrics
• It is possible to run built-in scripts such as
  custom scripts
• To simulate workloads for the defined business
  scenarios, custom scripts were used for each
  scenario

• Introduction
• Project problems
• Maintenance
• Working hrs. assignment
• Results
• Employee management
• Results
• Conclusion

6/16
7
Project problems

• Domino Server.Load was not able to address
  QueryViews until
• IBM Lotus Domino/Notes Release 7.0.1, available
  since February 2006 and
• A Notes.ini command line for HTTP access and
  debugging of QueryViews was added
• A short Help-Documentation of Server.Load leads
  to several small problems
• Due to a small number of input-variables not all
  preferable test runs and consequential statements
  could be made
• A lot of software debugging had to be done before
  the performance tests could start

• Introduction
• Project problems
• Maintenance
• Working hrs. assignment
• Results
• Employee management
• Results
• Conclusion

7/16
8
Scenario Maintenance

• A companies IT-department has several service
  tasks to do
• Each task is stored as Notes data and is due at a
  specific date
• Problem
• In NSF realized with date-views containing _at_TODAY
  or _at_NOW functions in selection formulas
• Such views with unstable functions are weak spots
  for building view indices in NSF
• Solution
• Data is stored in DB2
• A SQL statement returns only data matching the
  date-restrictions

• Introduction
• Project problems
• Maintenance
• Working hrs. assignment
• Results
• Employee management
• Results
• Conclusion

8/16
9
Scenario Working hours assignment

• Employees have to assign their working hours and
  activities in a NSF for each working-day
• To prevent unauthorized access each document is
  protected by readers-fields
• Problem
• Views indices are globally held without any
  user-information, so displayed documents have to
  be calculated on every view-call depending on the
  current user
• With a huge amount of data this technique becomes
  a weak spot of index-building in NSF
• Solution
• Data is stored in DB2
• A SQL statement returns only data matching the
  users name

• Introduction
• Project problems
• Maintenance
• Working hrs. assignment
• Results
• Employee management
• Results
• Conclusion

9/16
10
Results Faster than NSF?

• Introduction
• Project problems
• Maintenance
• Working hrs. assignment
• Results
• Employee management
• Results
• Conclusion

10/16
11
Interesting points

• SELECTS without WHERE are faster than SELECTS
  with WHERE
• But most SQL statements work with WHERE clauses
• NSFDB2 becomes faster with a higher workload and
  therewith more valuable
• Highest performance boost by limiting the result
  sets
• Indexing needed to get nearly as fast as NSF

• Introduction
• Project problems
• Maintenance
• Working hrs. assignment
• Results
• Employee management
• Results
• Conclusion

11/16
12
Scenario Employee management

• Problem
• Employee data is managed in a NSF so far
• Everybody may see the name and phone number of
  all employees, but only HR may see the salary
• Difficult to realize, a challenge for security
  management
• Solution
• Salary data is stored in a different database
• With SQL-JOIN or UNION data from both databases
  is aggregated in one view

• Introduction
• Project problems
• Maintenance
• Working hrs. assignment
• Results
• Employee management
• Results
• Conclusion

12/16
13
Results

• Very performance-hungry
• Tests executed with half of the users and half of
  the documents
• UNION is much faster than a JOIN
• LEFT/RIGHT OUTER JOINS behave similar
• But comparing JOINS makes less sense
• UNION and UNION ALL have almost identical
  performance

• Introduction
• Project problems
• Maintenance
• Working hrs. assignment
• Results
• Employee management
• Results
• Conclusion

13/16
14
Conclusion

• NSFDB2 solutions are better than NSF solutions in
  some cases
• That is too weak to make a clear decision for
  NSFDB2 when implemented to circumvent NSF weak
  spots
• But aggregated data from different NSF databases
  in one view makes the security management much
  easier
• Now shifted from document-level to view-level

• Introduction
• Project problems
• Maintenance
• Working hrs. assignment
• Results
• Employee management
• Results
• Conclusion

14/16
15
Thank you and goodbye

• Thank you for your interest
• and goodbye!

15/16
16
Questions

• ?

16/16