Re: Which of the SYSIBM tables/views show the row count for

Lukas Beeler wrote:

The real, important work is still there, but many shops running i5/OS
are still stuck in their AS/400 mindset:

I won't spend a ton of time on this because it's truly an opinion piece, but consider that your mindset is partially colored by your experience.

* No transactions
* No referantial integrity
* No Journalling

Most IBM midrange shops haven't needed these because their primary purpose is to recover from a database or system crash, and these simply don't happen on the System i. Back in the days when disk space and CPU cycles were a premium, it was a huge benefit to not have to do these things. Now, I guess there's less reason, but I appreciate the fact that I don't have to do all the extra work entailed.

* No proper DB backup procedures (SWA, Journal Backups)

Most shops I know do backups fine. SWA is a nice feature, but not necessary. And if your don't use journals, you don't need to back them up!

* No proper DB API using stored procedures (e.G. RLA directly from the
App or SQL directly from the App)

This is an application design issue. A good server-based design is just as encapsulated as stored procedures and doesn't lock you into the SQL syntax (which was never designed for program-to-program calls).

* No SQL Indexes

We agree here, at least <smile>. If a shop is using SQL and not using indexes, then they definitely need education.

With many i5/OS databases stuck in the early eighties, there is not
much need for a database administrator.

Again, a lot of your complaints are design choices. You don't need transactions and journaling on every file in the system. RI is probably a good thing these days, but it's not necessary if your applications are written correctly. I'm just glad I don't work on a machine where transactions are required because the database goes casters up regularly.

My opinions, purely. Your mileage may vary.

Joe