I wonder: should I worry?

dr_te_z · #1 (**permalink**) 09-02-11, 04:21

1st quarter of 2012 my client is going to upgrade from 9.5 to 9.7. We are planning to make a backup of the 'old' server and restore that on the 'new' server. The biggest table is partitioned and once a year I run a script to create a new tablespace and add some partitions to that table for another year to come.

So, in december 2012 (I hope to see that day

) I will have one table in my database with partitions hosted by 'old fashioned' tablespaces and other partitions in 'v9.7 native' tablespaces.

Does not sound good, should I worry?

przytula_guy · #2 (**permalink**) 09-02-11, 06:40

what is meant by 'old fashioned' or native : regular / large ?

dr_te_z · #3 (**permalink**) 09-02-11, 09:28

No. Old fashioned is a tablespace created in db2 version prior to v9.7.
I call a tablespace native 9.7 when it is created in v9.7 and has the reclaimable storage attribute

IBM DB2 9.7 for Linux, UNIX and Windows Information Center

N.B. still looking for a way to convert our tablespaces as "post-restore" activity.

nvk@vhv · #4 (**permalink**) 09-03-11, 03:07

The Solution is in the linked Article:

Quote:

For table spaces created in an earlier version, you must first replace the table space with a new one created using DB2 V9.7. You can either unload and reload the data or move the data with an online table move operation using the SYSPROC.ADMIN_MOVE_TABLE procedure. Such a migration is not required, however. Table spaces for which reclaimable storage is enabled can coexist in the same database as table spaces without reclaimable storage.

Internet Services

Web Development

Digital Marketing

Consumer Tech