× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.


  1.  Home
  2. MIDRANGE-L
  3. March 2008

Re: Why non-keyed PFs back then? Why today? ( was Re: Which of the SYSIBM tables/views show the row count for )

i've worked in several shops that use journalling and commitment control
and never had any issues...(there was a very nasty bug in DB2/SMP we hit
but it was on an LF not a keyed PF). in a nutshell i've never seen any
issues with keyed PFs...

Thanks,
Tommy Holden



From:
rob@xxxxxxxxx
To:
Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:
03/11/2008 08:29 AM
Subject:
Re: Why non-keyed PFs back then? Why today? ( was Re: Which of the SYSIBM
tables/views show the row count for )



Tom,

That was the only reason that I remember. I was hoping no one else did
and it could be forgotten. Can anyone out there recall where this has
saved their bacon in the last 10 years?
First, I doubt that I'll get any positive responses. Second, I bet they
are journalling and have suspect backup practices.

Rob Berendt

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...
Replies:
Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.