Table In-Place Alter Identification
Dan (IDS 11.50.FC5 on AIX 6) wanted a way to find all tables with pending in-place ALTERs before an upgrade, without running oncheck -pT against 500+ tables. Art Kagel pointed to Fernando Nunes' blog stored procedure, but Dan found it missed at least one table he knew had a pending alter. John Miller suggested querying sysmaster directly: join sysactptnhdr to systabnames on partnum where pta_newvers <> pta_oldvers (showing pages left to alter), though this only covers currently/previously active partitions. Celso warned oncheck -pT locks tables and is slow. Fernando asked for oncheck output and a reproducer to debug his procedure; no confirmed fix for the missed table is recorded.
Auto-generated by DrWatson from the posts below — may be imperfect; read the full thread.
INF 11.50.FC5
O/S AIX 6
Is there anyway other than running an oncheck -pT against every table to
identify which tables have a current in-place alter going on? I want to
identify all at once so I can address each prior to upgrading. I do not want
to run oncheck -pT > 500 times for this particular DB.
I looked st the version column in systables and there doesn't seem to be a
starting point for this info. I was wondering about sysmaster:sysptncol flags
column but it isn't doc'd.
Any helpful hints would definatly be appreciated.
thanx,
dan
Check out Fernando Nunn's BLOG post on the subject:
http://informix-technology.blogspot.com/2011/09/get-pending-in-place-alters-obte
r-as.html
It is talking about the performance hit you may get when there are pending
alters on a table, but it provides a stored procedure to identify those
tables.
Art
Art S. Kagel
Advanced DataTools (www.advancedatatools.com)
Blog: http://informix-myview.blogspot.com/
Disclaimer: Please keep in mind that my own opinions are my own opinions
and do not reflect on my employer, Advanced DataTools, the IIUG, nor any
other organization with which I am associated either explicitly,
implicitly, or by inference. Neither do those opinions reflect those of
other individuals affiliated with any entity with which I am affiliated nor
those of the entities themselves.
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 8:50 AM, DAN MUELLER <dan.mueller@trnswrks.com>wrote:
> INF 11.50.FC5
> O/S AIX 6
>
> Is there anyway other than running an oncheck -pT against every table to
> identify which tables have a current in-place alter going on? I want to
> identify all at once so I can address each prior to upgrading. I do not
> want
> to run oncheck -pT > 500 times for this particular DB.
>
> I looked st the version column in systables and there doesn't seem to be a
> starting point for this info. I was wondering about sysmaster:sysptncol
> flags
> column but it isn't doc'd.
>
> Any helpful hints would definatly be appreciated.
>
> thanx,
> dan
>
>
>
>
*******************************************************************************
> Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.
>
>
--90e6ba6134b80c021b04b97aa4e4
Thanx Art, I actually found that and created the SP here but it is not finding
any hits where there are at least 1. I was going to shoot a mail to Fernando
when stuff hit the fan on 3 other systems here (-;
Dan
-----Original Message-----
From: ids-bounces@iiug.org [mailto:ids-bounces@iiug.org] On Behalf Of Art Kagel
Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2012 9:58 AM
To: ids@iiug.org
Subject: Re: Table In-Place Alter Identification [26287]
Check out Fernando Nunn's BLOG post on the subject:
http://informix-technology.blogspot.com/2011/09/get-pending-in-place-alters-obte
r-as.html
It is talking about the performance hit you may get when there are pending
alters on a table, but it provides a stored procedure to identify those tables.
Art
Art S. Kagel
Advanced DataTools (www.advancedatatools.com)
Blog: http://informix-myview.blogspot.com/
Disclaimer: Please keep in mind that my own opinions are my own opinions and
do not reflect on my employer, Advanced DataTools, the IIUG, nor any other
organization with which I am associated either explicitly, implicitly, or by
inference. Neither do those opinions reflect those of other individuals
affiliated with any entity with which I am affiliated nor those of the
entities themselves.
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 8:50 AM, DAN MUELLER <dan.mueller@trnswrks.com>wrote:
> INF 11.50.FC5
> O/S AIX 6
>
> Is there anyway other than running an oncheck -pT against every table
> to identify which tables have a current in-place alter going on? I
> want to identify all at once so I can address each prior to upgrading.
> I do not want to run oncheck -pT > 500 times for this particular DB.
>
> I looked st the version column in systables and there doesn't seem to
> be a starting point for this info. I was wondering about
> sysmaster:sysptncol flags column but it isn't doc'd.
>
> Any helpful hints would definatly be appreciated.
>
> thanx,
> dan
>
>
>
>
*******************************************************************************
> Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.
>
>
--90e6ba6134b80c021b04b97aa4e4
*******************************************************************************
Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.
How about you try the following select statement. It will only find
tables/fragments
which are or have been active?
select TRIM( T.dbsname ) ||":" ||TRIM( T.tabname )
,pta_totpgs as page_left_to_alter
,npdata
from sysmaster:sysactptnhdr P, sysmaster:systabnames T
where T.partnum = P.partnum
and pta_newvers <> pta_oldvers;
John F. Miller III
STSM, Embedability Architect
miller3@us.ibm.com
503-578-5645
IBM Informix Dynamic Server (IDS)
(Embedded image moved to file: pic61936.gif)
ids-bounces@iiug.org wrote on 02/21/2012 07:06:32 AM:
> From: "Dan Mueller" <Dan.Mueller@trnswrks.com>
> To: ids@iiug.org
> Date: 02/21/2012 07:14 AM
> Subject: RE: Table In-Place Alter Identification [26288]
> Sent by: ids-bounces@iiug.org
>
> Thanx Art, I actually found that and created the SP here but it is
> not finding
> any hits where there are at least 1. I was going to shoot a mail to
Fernando
> when stuff hit the fan on 3 other systems here (-;
>
> Dan
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ids-bounces@iiug.org [mailto:ids-bounces@iiug.org] On Behalf Of Art
> Kagel
> Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2012 9:58 AM
> To: ids@iiug.org
> Subject: Re: Table In-Place Alter Identification [26287]
>
> Check out Fernando Nunn's BLOG post on the subject:
>
>
> http://informix-technology.blogspot.com/2011/09/get-pending-in-
> place-alters-obter-as.html
>
> It is talking about the performance hit you may get when there are
pending
> alters on a table, but it provides a stored procedure to identify those
> tables.
>
> Art
>
> Art S. Kagel
> Advanced DataTools (www.advancedatatools.com)
> Blog: http://informix-myview.blogspot.com/
>
> Disclaimer: Please keep in mind that my own opinions are my own opinions
and
> do not reflect on my employer, Advanced DataTools, the IIUG, nor any
other
> organization with which I am associated either explicitly, implicitly, or
by
> inference. Neither do those opinions reflect those of other individuals
> affiliated with any entity with which I am affiliated nor those of the
> entities themselves.
>
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 8:50 AM, DAN MUELLER
<dan.mueller@trnswrks.com>wrote:
>
> > INF 11.50.FC5
> > O/S AIX 6
> >
> > Is there anyway other than running an oncheck -pT against every table
> > to identify which tables have a current in-place alter going on? I
> > want to identify all at once so I can address each prior to upgrading.
> > I do not want to run oncheck -pT > 500 times for this particular DB.
> >
> > I looked st the version column in systables and there doesn't seem to
> > be a starting point for this info. I was wondering about
> > sysmaster:sysptncol flags column but it isn't doc'd.
> >
> > Any helpful hints would definatly be appreciated.
> >
> > thanx,
> > dan
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
*******************************************************************************
> > Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.
> >
> >
>
> --90e6ba6134b80c021b04b97aa4e4
>
>
>
*******************************************************************************
> Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.
>
>
>
*******************************************************************************
> Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.
>
Hmmmm? I'd say I've done extensive testing, but we're constantly seeing
that reality surpasses the tests...
Can you provid an oncheck -pT of the table (it will take a long time for
big tables...)
Thanks.
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 3:06 PM, Dan Mueller <Dan.Mueller@trnswrks.com>wrote:
> Thanx Art, I actually found that and created the SP here but it is not
> finding
> any hits where there are at least 1. I was going to shoot a mail to
> Fernando
> when stuff hit the fan on 3 other systems here (-;
>
> Dan
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ids-bounces@iiug.org [mailto:ids-bounces@iiug.org] On Behalf Of Art
> Kagel
> Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2012 9:58 AM
> To: ids@iiug.org
> Subject: Re: Table In-Place Alter Identification [26287]
>
> Check out Fernando Nunn's BLOG post on the subject:
>
>
>
>
http://informix-technology.blogspot.com/2011/09/get-pending-in-place-alters-obte
r-as.html
>
> It is talking about the performance hit you may get when there are pending
> alters on a table, but it provides a stored procedure to identify those
> tables.
>
> Art
>
> Art S. Kagel
> Advanced DataTools (www.advancedatatools.com)
> Blog: http://informix-myview.blogspot.com/
>
> Disclaimer: Please keep in mind that my own opinions are my own opinions
> and
> do not reflect on my employer, Advanced DataTools, the IIUG, nor any other
> organization with which I am associated either explicitly, implicitly, or
> by
> inference. Neither do those opinions reflect those of other individuals
> affiliated with any entity with which I am affiliated nor those of the
> entities themselves.
>
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 8:50 AM, DAN MUELLER <dan.mueller@trnswrks.com
> >wrote:
>
> > INF 11.50.FC5
> > O/S AIX 6
> >
> > Is there anyway other than running an oncheck -pT against every table
> > to identify which tables have a current in-place alter going on? I
> > want to identify all at once so I can address each prior to upgrading.
> > I do not want to run oncheck -pT > 500 times for this particular DB.
> >
> > I looked st the version column in systables and there doesn't seem to
> > be a starting point for this info. I was wondering about
> > sysmaster:sysptncol flags column but it isn't doc'd.
> >
> > Any helpful hints would definatly be appreciated.
> >
> > thanx,
> > dan
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
*******************************************************************************
> > Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.
> >
> >
>
> --90e6ba6134b80c021b04b97aa4e4
>
>
>
>
*******************************************************************************
> Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.
>
>
>
>
*******************************************************************************
> Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.
>
>
--
Fernando Nunes
Portugal
http://informix-technology.blogspot.com
My email works... but I don't check it frequently...
--00248c70fbf18a82df04b98057c2
Fernando,
I appreciate both the reply and the usefulness of this particular SP. I am
running the oncheck -pT against the table that I know is being missed. I will
forward that output to you outside of the forum when it is ready. Thanx for
the assistance.
Dan
-----Original Message-----
From: ids-bounces@iiug.org [mailto:ids-bounces@iiug.org] On Behalf Of Fernando
Nunes
Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2012 4:46 PM
To: ids@iiug.org
Subject: Re: Table In-Place Alter Identification [26295]
Hmmmm? I'd say I've done extensive testing, but we're constantly seeing that
reality surpasses the tests...
Can you provid an oncheck -pT of the table (it will take a long time for big
tables...)
Thanks.
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 3:06 PM, Dan Mueller <Dan.Mueller@trnswrks.com>wrote:
> Thanx Art, I actually found that and created the SP here but it is not
> finding any hits where there are at least 1. I was going to shoot a
> mail to Fernando when stuff hit the fan on 3 other systems here (-;
>
> Dan
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ids-bounces@iiug.org [mailto:ids-bounces@iiug.org] On Behalf Of Art
> Kagel
> Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2012 9:58 AM
> To: ids@iiug.org
> Subject: Re: Table In-Place Alter Identification [26287]
>
> Check out Fernando Nunn's BLOG post on the subject:
>
>
>
>
http://informix-technology.blogspot.com/2011/09/get-pending-in-place-alters-obte
r-as.html
>
> It is talking about the performance hit you may get when there are pending
> alters on a table, but it provides a stored procedure to identify those
> tables.
>
> Art
>
> Art S. Kagel
> Advanced DataTools (www.advancedatatools.com)
> Blog: http://informix-myview.blogspot.com/
>
> Disclaimer: Please keep in mind that my own opinions are my own opinions
> and
> do not reflect on my employer, Advanced DataTools, the IIUG, nor any other
> organization with which I am associated either explicitly, implicitly, or
> by
> inference. Neither do those opinions reflect those of other individuals
> affiliated with any entity with which I am affiliated nor those of the
> entities themselves.
>
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 8:50 AM, DAN MUELLER <dan.mueller@trnswrks.com
> >wrote:
>
> > INF 11.50.FC5
> > O/S AIX 6
> >
> > Is there anyway other than running an oncheck -pT against every table
> > to identify which tables have a current in-place alter going on? I
> > want to identify all at once so I can address each prior to upgrading.
> > I do not want to run oncheck -pT > 500 times for this particular DB.
> >
> > I looked st the version column in systables and there doesn't seem to
> > be a starting point for this info. I was wondering about
> > sysmaster:sysptncol flags column but it isn't doc'd.
> >
> > Any helpful hints would definatly be appreciated.
> >
> > thanx,
> > dan
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
*******************************************************************************
> > Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.
> >
> >
>
> --90e6ba6134b80c021b04b97aa4e4
>
>
>
>
*******************************************************************************
> Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.
>
>
>
>
*******************************************************************************
> Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.
>
>
--
Fernando Nunes
Portugal
http://informix-technology.blogspot.com
My email works... but I don't check it frequently...
--00248c70fbf18a82df04b98057c2
*******************************************************************************
Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.
Thanx John - again (-;
Dan
-----Original Message-----
From: ids-bounces@iiug.org [mailto:ids-bounces@iiug.org] On Behalf Of John
Miller iii
Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2012 3:34 PM
To: ids@iiug.org
Subject: RE: Table In-Place Alter Identification [26294]
How about you try the following select statement. It will only find
tables/fragments which are or have been active?
select TRIM( T.dbsname ) ||":" ||TRIM( T.tabname ) ,pta_totpgs as
page_left_to_alter ,npdata from sysmaster:sysactptnhdr P,
sysmaster:systabnames T where T.partnum = P.partnum and pta_newvers <>
pta_oldvers;
John F. Miller III
STSM, Embedability Architect
miller3@us.ibm.com
503-578-5645
IBM Informix Dynamic Server (IDS)
(Embedded image moved to file: pic61936.gif)
ids-bounces@iiug.org wrote on 02/21/2012 07:06:32 AM:
> From: "Dan Mueller" <Dan.Mueller@trnswrks.com>
> To: ids@iiug.org
> Date: 02/21/2012 07:14 AM
> Subject: RE: Table In-Place Alter Identification [26288] Sent by:
> ids-bounces@iiug.org
>
> Thanx Art, I actually found that and created the SP here but it is not
> finding any hits where there are at least 1. I was going to shoot a
> mail to
Fernando
> when stuff hit the fan on 3 other systems here (-;
>
> Dan
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ids-bounces@iiug.org [mailto:ids-bounces@iiug.org] On Behalf Of
> Art
> Kagel
> Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2012 9:58 AM
> To: ids@iiug.org
> Subject: Re: Table In-Place Alter Identification [26287]
>
> Check out Fernando Nunn's BLOG post on the subject:
>
>
> http://informix-technology.blogspot.com/2011/09/get-pending-in-
> place-alters-obter-as.html
>
> It is talking about the performance hit you may get when there are
pending
> alters on a table, but it provides a stored procedure to identify
> those tables.
>
> Art
>
> Art S. Kagel
> Advanced DataTools (www.advancedatatools.com)
> Blog: http://informix-myview.blogspot.com/
>
> Disclaimer: Please keep in mind that my own opinions are my own
> opinions
and
> do not reflect on my employer, Advanced DataTools, the IIUG, nor any
other
> organization with which I am associated either explicitly, implicitly,
> or
by
> inference. Neither do those opinions reflect those of other
> individuals affiliated with any entity with which I am affiliated nor
> those of the entities themselves.
>
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 8:50 AM, DAN MUELLER
<dan.mueller@trnswrks.com>wrote:
>
> > INF 11.50.FC5
> > O/S AIX 6
> >
> > Is there anyway other than running an oncheck -pT against every
> > table to identify which tables have a current in-place alter going
> > on? I want to identify all at once so I can address each prior to
upgrading.
> > I do not want to run oncheck -pT > 500 times for this particular DB.
> >
> > I looked st the version column in systables and there doesn't seem
> > to be a starting point for this info. I was wondering about
> > sysmaster:sysptncol flags column but it isn't doc'd.
> >
> > Any helpful hints would definatly be appreciated.
> >
> > thanx,
> > dan
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
*******************************************************************************
> > Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.
> >
> >
>
> --90e6ba6134b80c021b04b97aa4e4
>
>
>
*******************************************************************************
> Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.
>
>
>
*******************************************************************************
> Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.
>
*******************************************************************************
Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.
Dan,
Be careful running oncheck -pT against tables, it locks the table and you
might have problems in your application. Furthermore it will last long time
for large tables.
If you application is not up and running, than ignore this message.
Celso Cabral Coimbra
Administrador de Banco de Dados
ClearTech Ltda
"Trust at the heart of Communications"
Tel. (11) 3576-4509
-----Mensagem original-----
De: ids-bounces@iiug.org [mailto:ids-bounces@iiug.org] Em nome de Dan Mueller
Enviada em: quarta-feira, 22 de fevereiro de 2012 09:29
Para: ids@iiug.org
Assunto: RE: Table In-Place Alter Identification [26303]
Fernando,
I appreciate both the reply and the usefulness of this particular SP. I am
running the oncheck -pT against the table that I know is being missed. I will
forward that output to you outside of the forum when it is ready. Thanx for
the assistance.
Dan
-----Original Message-----
From: ids-bounces@iiug.org [mailto:ids-bounces@iiug.org] On Behalf Of Fernando
Nunes
Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2012 4:46 PM
To: ids@iiug.org
Subject: Re: Table In-Place Alter Identification [26295]
Hmmmm? I'd say I've done extensive testing, but we're constantly seeing that
reality surpasses the tests...
Can you provid an oncheck -pT of the table (it will take a long time for big
tables...)
Thanks.
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 3:06 PM, Dan Mueller <Dan.Mueller@trnswrks.com>wrote:
> Thanx Art, I actually found that and created the SP here but it is not
> finding any hits where there are at least 1. I was going to shoot a
> mail to Fernando when stuff hit the fan on 3 other systems here (-;
>
> Dan
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ids-bounces@iiug.org [mailto:ids-bounces@iiug.org] On Behalf Of Art
> Kagel
> Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2012 9:58 AM
> To: ids@iiug.org
> Subject: Re: Table In-Place Alter Identification [26287]
>
> Check out Fernando Nunn's BLOG post on the subject:
>
>
>
>
http://informix-technology.blogspot.com/2011/09/get-pending-in-place-alters-obte
r-as.html
>
> It is talking about the performance hit you may get when there are pending
> alters on a table, but it provides a stored procedure to identify those
> tables.
>
> Art
>
> Art S. Kagel
> Advanced DataTools (www.advancedatatools.com)
> Blog: http://informix-myview.blogspot.com/
>
> Disclaimer: Please keep in mind that my own opinions are my own opinions
> and
> do not reflect on my employer, Advanced DataTools, the IIUG, nor any other
> organization with which I am associated either explicitly, implicitly, or
> by
> inference. Neither do those opinions reflect those of other individuals
> affiliated with any entity with which I am affiliated nor those of the
> entities themselves.
>
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 8:50 AM, DAN MUELLER <dan.mueller@trnswrks.com
> >wrote:
>
> > INF 11.50.FC5
> > O/S AIX 6
> >
> > Is there anyway other than running an oncheck -pT against every table
> > to identify which tables have a current in-place alter going on? I
> > want to identify all at once so I can address each prior to upgrading.
> > I do not want to run oncheck -pT > 500 times for this particular DB.
> >
> > I looked st the version column in systables and there doesn't seem to
> > be a starting point for this info. I was wondering about
> > sysmaster:sysptncol flags column but it isn't doc'd.
> >
> > Any helpful hints would definatly be appreciated.
> >
> > thanx,
> > dan
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
*******************************************************************************
> > Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.
> >
> >
>
> --90e6ba6134b80c021b04b97aa4e4
>
>
>
>
*******************************************************************************
> Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.
>
>
>
>
*******************************************************************************
> Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.
>
>
--
Fernando Nunes
Portugal
http://informix-technology.blogspot.com
My email works... but I don't check it frequently...
--00248c70fbf18a82df04b98057c2
*******************************************************************************
Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.
*******************************************************************************
Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.
Sure. Meanwhile if you could make a quick test:
create table... with a row size close to the page limit
insert into table
alter table add ...
insert into the table again
run oncheck -pT to make sure it has inplace
run the procedure to see if it shows up...
Thanks
On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 12:29 PM, Dan Mueller <Dan.Mueller@trnswrks.com>wrote:
> Fernando,
>
> I appreciate both the reply and the usefulness of this particular SP. I am
> running the oncheck -pT against the table that I know is being missed. I
> will
> forward that output to you outside of the forum when it is ready. Thanx for
> the assistance.
>
> Dan
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ids-bounces@iiug.org [mailto:ids-bounces@iiug.org] On Behalf Of
> Fernando
> Nunes
> Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2012 4:46 PM
> To: ids@iiug.org
> Subject: Re: Table In-Place Alter Identification [26295]
>
> Hmmmm? I'd say I've done extensive testing, but we're constantly seeing
> that
> reality surpasses the tests...
> Can you provid an oncheck -pT of the table (it will take a long time for
> big
> tables...)
>
> Thanks.
>
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 3:06 PM, Dan Mueller <Dan.Mueller@trnswrks.com
> >wrote:
>
> > Thanx Art, I actually found that and created the SP here but it is not
> > finding any hits where there are at least 1. I was going to shoot a
> > mail to Fernando when stuff hit the fan on 3 other systems here (-;
> >
> > Dan
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ids-bounces@iiug.org [mailto:ids-bounces@iiug.org] On Behalf Of
> Art
> > Kagel
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2012 9:58 AM
> > To: ids@iiug.org
> > Subject: Re: Table In-Place Alter Identification [26287]
> >
> > Check out Fernando Nunn's BLOG post on the subject:
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
http://informix-technology.blogspot.com/2011/09/get-pending-in-place-alters-obte
r-as.html
> >
> > It is talking about the performance hit you may get when there are
> pending
> > alters on a table, but it provides a stored procedure to identify those
> > tables.
> >
> > Art
> >
> > Art S. Kagel
> > Advanced DataTools (www.advancedatatools.com)
> > Blog: http://informix-myview.blogspot.com/
> >
> > Disclaimer: Please keep in mind that my own opinions are my own opinions
> > and
> > do not reflect on my employer, Advanced DataTools, the IIUG, nor any
> other
> > organization with which I am associated either explicitly, implicitly, or
> > by
> > inference. Neither do those opinions reflect those of other individuals
> > affiliated with any entity with which I am affiliated nor those of the
> > entities themselves.
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 8:50 AM, DAN MUELLER <dan.mueller@trnswrks.com
> > >wrote:
> >
> > > INF 11.50.FC5
> > > O/S AIX 6
> > >
> > > Is there anyway other than running an oncheck -pT against every table
> > > to identify which tables have a current in-place alter going on? I
> > > want to identify all at once so I can address each prior to upgrading.
> > > I do not want to run oncheck -pT > 500 times for this particular DB.
> > >
> > > I looked st the version column in systables and there doesn't seem to
> > > be a starting point for this info. I was wondering about
> > > sysmaster:sysptncol flags column but it isn't doc'd.
> > >
> > > Any helpful hints would definatly be appreciated.
> > >
> > > thanx,
> > > dan
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
*******************************************************************************
> > > Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --90e6ba6134b80c021b04b97aa4e4
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
*******************************************************************************
> > Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
*******************************************************************************
> > Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.
> >
> >
>
> --
> Fernando Nunes
> Portugal
>
> http://informix-technology.blogspot.com
> My email works... but I don't check it frequently...
>
> --00248c70fbf18a82df04b98057c2
>
>
>
>
*******************************************************************************
> Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.
>
>
>
>
*******************************************************************************
> Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.
>
>
--
Fernando Nunes
Portugal
http://informix-technology.blogspot.com
My email works... but I don't check it frequently...
--0023544719a815737304b98dc77a