RE: RMVM for SQL index objects -- MIDRANGE-L

× 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.

It isn't as bad as it was, but noticeable. In addition, if journaling is active on any of those files, it is a good idea to end journaling first as that has a larger impact than indexes. That is as of v6.1. I haven't been involved in any large scale copy/purge data projects on a newer version than that.

Mark Murphy
STAR BASE Consulting, Inc.
mmurphy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

-----Rob Berendt <rob@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: -----
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Rob Berendt <rob@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: 06/30/2016 07:34AM
Subject: RE: RMVM for SQL index objects

There is a school of thought, disputed by some, that multiple indexes
aren't the beast that they used to be. Yes, I'm old enough to remember
numerous John Sears lectures on how he helped peoples performance by
reducing the very high (at the time) number of indexes they had against
their tables. Numerous "names" since then have said that IBM has really
changed stuff over the years that the performance hit isn't nearly as
severe.

Rob Berendt

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.