Yes, but with some files containing north of 250 million records and close
to a hundred logicals and indexes over them, the lights in the data center
start to dim while the access paths are being rebuilt.
Paul Nelson
Cell 708-670-6978
Office 409-267-4027
nelsonp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
-----Original Message-----
From: MIDRANGE-L [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Steinmetz, Paul
Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2016 3:33 PM
To: 'Midrange Systems Technical Discussion'
Subject: RE: RMVM for SQL index objects
Paul,
Did you consider using reorg while active?
I created a little utility (few cdl and querys) that automatically runs once
a month.
Removes all deleted records from all files, unattended.
Paul
-----Original Message-----
From: MIDRANGE-L [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Paul
Nelson
Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2016 4:28 PM
To: 'Midrange Systems Technical Discussion'
Subject: RE: RMVM for SQL index objects
We're working on a huge file reorg project. We have a 17TB system that's
over 75% full. We have determined we can get down around 50% by getting rid
of deleted records. Once we accomplish that, we'll change over to reusing
deleted records.
RMVM beforehand and ADDLFM afterward has always been the way to go to avoid
thrashing. But that was before the proliferation of SQL indexes.
:-)
Paul Nelson
Cell 708-670-6978
Office 409-267-4027
nelsonp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
-----Original Message-----
From: MIDRANGE-L [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
CRPence
Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2016 3:15 PM
To: midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: RMVM for SQL index objects
On 29-Jun-2016 14:55 -0500, Paul Nelson wrote:
On 29-Jun-2016 14:40 -0500, Paul Nelson wrote:
Does anybody know the equivalent command in the SQL world?
That's probably it. If I add the index back after a file reorg, will
that set me up for level checks?
Ah. So the inquiry from the OP is regarding an intention to disable the
keyed Access Path (ACCPTH) [maintenance] during a Reorganize Physical File
Member (RGZPFM) against the underlying data?
So perhaps the AccPth of the INDEX is defined UNIQUE, thus preventing
changing the Maintenance (MAINT) attribute? In that case, the DROP INDEX
[or Delete File (DLTF)] can be used after a Save Object (SAVOBJ), and the
Restore Object (RSTOBJ) done afterward -- there could be two restores, one
first without the member, and then another to restore the member, but there
would be no point in so doing.
FWiW the ALWCANCEL(*NO) reorg will already disable a non-unique keyed
AccPth, and move the rebuild until afterward in an async runpty-52 QDBSRV##
system job. And a non-unique AccPth could be modified with Change Logical
File (CHGLF) to set the Maintenance (MAINT) attribute to the special value
of *REBLD [¿possibly required?: in conjunction with RECOVER(*NO)].
Maybe some background about the scenario, to help explain the reasoning
for the approach; perhaps discussion can lead to a different path.?
--
Regards, Chuck
--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx To subscribe, unsubscribe,
or change list options,
visit:
http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx Before posting, please take a
moment to review the archives at
http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.
Please contact support@xxxxxxxxxxxx for any subscription related questions.
--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx To subscribe, unsubscribe,
or change list options,
visit:
http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx Before posting, please take a
moment to review the archives at
http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.
Please contact support@xxxxxxxxxxxx for any subscription related questions.
midrange.com
