Q and A

Asked and Answered

Divide and Conquer

In the DB2 DBA column " Divide and Conquer " (Quarter 3, 2001), you write that there's no good reason to use the simple tablespace. Why not? At our DB2 for 0S/390 v.6 environment we use it most of the time, because segmented tablespaces do not permit the running of DB2 utilities such as LOAD with REPLACE and REORG at one table (only on the whole tablespace). Therefore, if you want to load a table you also have to reload the other tables of the (segmented) tablespaces. This, of course, is serious overhead and risk if it happens many times a day. I like to work with segmented tablespaces, but they do result in a lot of overhead with intensive use of the DB2 utilities.

Robert Catterall responds:

Good point, I had not considered that scenario. I agree with you that simple tablespaces can be a good choice if you like to have multiple tables per tablespace (they can ease database management if you have a large number of small-to-medium-sized tables) and you like to use LOAD REPLACE or REORG for individual tables in the tablespaces.

See a complete archive of reader/author Q&As .

Back to Divide and Conquer by Robert Catterall