Re: Index over QSYS/QADBXREF -- MIDRANGE-L

Good News Everybody!

The new search engine is LIVE!

Please report any problems to david (at) midrange.com.

Subject: Re: Index over QSYS/QADBXREF
From: Mark Waterbury <mark.s.waterbury@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2022 02:15:20 +0000 (UTC)
List-archive: <https://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l/>
List-post: <mailto:midrange-l@lists.midrange.com>
List-subscribe: <https://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l>, <mailto:midrange-l-request@lists.midrange.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <https://lists.midrange.com/mailman/options/midrange-l>, <mailto:midrange-l-request@lists.midrange.com?subject=unsubscribe>

Justin,

Since you are using an IBM supplied table function, or view, or whatever, (QSYS2.RECORD_LOCK_INFO), open a "PMR" or "case" with IBM Support to report this as a problem, and suggest that IBM should "fix" this.

All the best,

Mark S. Waterbury

On Friday, September 9, 2022 at 10:19:50 AM EDT, Justin Taylor <jtaylor.0ab@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

VE is recommending an index over QSYS/QADBXREF. The query in question is using QSYS2.RECORD_LOCK_INFO. I've never seen an index recommended over a QSYS table before. Is it a bad idea to create indexes over QSYS tables (they'd be in a diff schema of course).

TIA

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

Follow-Ups:

Re[2]: Index over QSYS/QADBXREF , MidrangeL

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2026 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.