• Search Forums
    Advanced Search Topics Posts
Prev
Next
Forums Infor / Lawson Platforms S3 Systems Administration

Move away from law_dba tables

 3 Replies
 0 Subscribed to this topic
 27 Subscribed to this forum
Sort:
Author
Messages
Richard J Sculpher
Basic Member Send Private Message
Posts: 15
Basic Member
5/29/2012 11:22 AM
Hi - when we create a new table that uses VARCHAR2 we have to add a line in the law_dba_table table to show that we are using VARCHAR2. Likewise we have to put new indexes in the law_dba_index table. The theory is that when the reorg runs it looks in the law_dba tables then dbdef for the data it needs to do the reorg. That's the theory...at the moment it doesn't always look in the law_dba tables.

Lawson no longer support the law_dba tables - we can use them but they won't fix them if they break. They supply the editda utility to update dbdef. dbdef can be updated directly, but not to add the VARCHAR2 specification. That can only be added via editda.

We want to move away from the law_dba tables as they are no longer supported. To do so we need to create the data for the editda process. The editda does provide an export process for the dbdef, but it doesn't extract VARCHAR2 data as that is in the law_dba tables.

I am about to try to write a process which will create the editda input from an extract from the law_dba tables. Before I start though, has anyone else encountered the same challenge...and if so what was your solution. I should point out that currently we have just one database space name defined, which is our default. We define other tablespace names for tables and indexes in the law_dba tables. For editda we will have to define more database space names to cover all the mixes of table and index space names used in the law_dba tables.

Further, currently we have multiple indexes on a table...and these indexes can be in one or more index spaces. editda (and hence dbdef) allows indexes for one table to go into only one index space. This is going to be inconvenient - has anyone a work-around to this?

Anyone any thoughts?

Thanks

Richard
J.Desrosiers
New Member Send Private Message
Posts: 1
New Member
8/30/2012 2:27 PM
Hi,
We have Lawson & LandMark software installed here.
We currently have multiple tablespaces for tables and indexes.
Am I reading your thread correctly that Lawson will not allow this in the future?

Thanks
Jean
Richard J Sculpher
Basic Member Send Private Message
Posts: 15
Basic Member
8/31/2012 6:56 AM
Hi Jean

The restriction I was trying to describe relates to multiple indexes on a single table. Currently we may put these multiple indexes in different index spaces, thus index1 might be in the large indexspace and index2 in the small indexspace, depending on how much space is required for that index.

We are able to do this because we can define the indexspace for an individula index within the law_dba_index table. However when the law_dba* tables are no longer available (they are not supported now), all the indexes for an individual table will have to go into the same indexspace, so in the example above both index1 and index2 would have to go into the large indexspace despite index2 not needing a space of that size.

Our DBA doesn't like this move as it removes flexibility.

I hope that clarifies the position - if not let me know and I'll try again  :-)

Richard
Scooby
Basic Member Send Private Message
Posts: 13
Basic Member
12/3/2012 6:53 PM
To Clarify: From Inside Lawson: LAW_DBA_TABLES are not being dropped or desupported