No the way to change this is to change the values in the hashing algorithm.
These are really only the entries in the database ( remove some) and the
capacity.  As has been mentioned the capacities of prime numbers seem to do
better in distribution.  But will leave this to the Bradmark and Adager
people to talk about finding the best capacity for a set of values.


-------------------------------------------------
Larry Simonsen                Phone: 801-489-2450
Flowserve Corporation     Fax: 801-491-1750
PO Box 2200                    http://www.Flowserve.com
Springville, UT 84663      e-mail: [log in to unmask]
-------------------------------------------------
All opinions expressed herein are my own and reflect, in no way, those of my
employer.

 -----Original Message-----
From:   Dave Darnell [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent:   Wednesday, January 03, 2001 10:52 AM
To:     'Simonsen, Larry'; [log in to unmask]
Subject:        RE: Transact database program getting slower

Would an unload/reload clear this up?

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Simonsen, Larry [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2001 10:48 AM
> To: Dave Darnell; [log in to unmask]
> Subject: RE: Transact database program getting slower
>
>
> One thing to look at is how clustered are the full blocks.
> Things look
> great for access but if the blocks are clustered then the
> puts into the
> cluster can be really slow (serial read to find free record
> for new entry).
>
> -------------------------------------------------
> Larry Simonsen                Phone: 801-489-2450
> Flowserve Corporation     Fax: 801-491-1750
> PO Box 2200                    http://www.Flowserve.com
> Springville, UT 84663      e-mail: [log in to unmask]
> -------------------------------------------------
> All opinions expressed herein are my own and reflect, in no
> way, those of my
> employer.
>
>  -----Original Message-----
> From:         Dave Darnell
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2001 10:47 AM
> To:   [log in to unmask]
> Subject:      Re: Transact database program getting slower
>
> I don't think that this is a high enough percent secondaries
> to really cause
> a performance degradation (anyone who disagrees please
> respond.)  Average
> chain length and it's variability look very nice.  I don't
> see any problems
> here!  What am I missing everyone?
>
> -dtd
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Chris Schofield [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2001 10:17 AM
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: Transact database program getting slower
> >
> >
> > Hello Everyone
> >
> > Thanks for the very many replies.
> >
> > Unfortunately I do not have adager or robelle software,
> > therefore I have not
> > got howmessy.  I have emailed Robelle about getting a copy.
> >
> > I do however have a listing produced by DBLOADSX from Beechglen.
> >
> > The program was run remotely and the info faxed to me.  I
> > will list all the
> > info
> >
> > Capacity 6000011
> > Num Entries 3010823
> > Load Factor 50.1
> > Secondaries 22.1
> > Max Pgs 0
> > Block Factor 13
> > Max Chain 10
> > Avg Chain 1.28
> > Std Dev 0.56
> > Expected Blocks 1.00
> > Avg Blocks 1.00
> > Elongation 1.00
> > Number of Primaries 2335771
> > Number of Secondaries 675052
> > Number of Chains 558256
> > External Pointers 0
> > Contiguous Pointers 675052
> > Total Blocks 461540
> > Full Blocks 15204
> >
> > I think I got everything !
> >
> > Is this any use ? Does this give anybody any clues ?
> >
> > Extra info.  This database started at 1 million capacity
> and has been
> > increased several times since then.  Could this be affecting
> > the hashing
> > algorithm ?  I read somewhere that the algorithm uses the
> > capacity of the
> > set.  Is this the original capacity perhaps ?
> >
> > Hopefully I will get a copy of Howmessy from Robelle
> >
> > Thanks again for all you ideas
> >
> > Chris
> >
>