Unix Technical Forum

modifed timestamp of a table

This is a discussion on modifed timestamp of a table within the DB2 forums, part of the Database Server Software category; --> Hi, Information with regard to creation of a table is stored in SYSTABLES. Is modified time stamp of a ...


Go Back   Unix Technical Forum > Database Server Software > DB2

FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 02-27-2008, 07:16 AM
Sumanth
 
Posts: n/a
Default modifed timestamp of a table

Hi,

Information with regard to creation of a table is stored in SYSTABLES.
Is modified time stamp of a table stored in
DB2, if so where.

Thanks,
Sumanth


Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 02-27-2008, 07:16 AM
Shashi Mannepalli
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: modifed timestamp of a table

No this information is not stored in any of the CATALOG tables.
But all the changes will be LOGGED. You can use db2urlog or something
like that
to read those LOGS and check for a particular table....

This entire process is complex...

cheers...
Shashi Mannepalli
Sumanth wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Information with regard to creation of a table is stored in SYSTABLES.
> Is modified time stamp of a table stored in
> DB2, if so where.
>
> Thanks,
> Sumanth


Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 02-27-2008, 07:17 AM
Knut Stolze
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: modifed timestamp of a table

Sumanth wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Information with regard to creation of a table is stored in SYSTABLES.
> Is modified time stamp of a table stored in


You should use only the views in the SYSCAT schema, i.e. SYSCAT.TABLES. All
tables in the SYSIBM schema are not documented and they may change at any
time, breaking your application if you rely on them.

> DB2, if so where.


The actual timestamp of the last data modification is not automatically
tracked. This would be a huge bottle-neck performance-wise if it were
done.

--
Knut Stolze
DB2 Information Integration Development
IBM Germany
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 02-27-2008, 07:17 AM
aj
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: modifed timestamp of a table

Knut Stolze wrote:
....snip...
>
> The actual timestamp of the last data modification is not automatically
> tracked. This would be a huge bottle-neck performance-wise if it were
> done.


But its been requested over and over and over again. Seems like those
smart IBM engineers could figure out some way to do it w/o screwing up
performance.

aj
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 02-27-2008, 07:17 AM
Gregor =?ISO-8859-2?Q?Kova=E8?=
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: modifed timestamp of a table

aj wrote:

> Knut Stolze wrote:
> ...snip...
>>
>> The actual timestamp of the last data modification is not automatically
>> tracked. This would be a huge bottle-neck performance-wise if it were
>> done.

>
> But its been requested over and over and over again. Seems like those
> smart IBM engineers could figure out some way to do it w/o screwing up
> performance.
>
> aj

And I'd only need the time of last ALTER TABLE )
--
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
| Gregor Kovac | Gregor.Kovac@mikropis.si |
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
| In A World Without Fences Who Needs Gates? |
| Experience Linux. |
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 02-27-2008, 07:19 AM
Knut Stolze
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: modifed timestamp of a table

Gregor Kovač wrote:

> aj wrote:
>
>> Knut Stolze wrote:
>> ...snip...
>>>
>>> The actual timestamp of the last data modification is not automatically
>>> tracked. This would be a huge bottle-neck performance-wise if it were
>>> done.

>>
>> But its been requested over and over and over again. Seems like those
>> smart IBM engineers could figure out some way to do it w/o screwing up
>> performance.


As soon as someone implements a general purpose sorting mechanism that runs
faster than O(n log n), we can probably discuss the tuple counter
again. ;-)

> And I'd only need the time of last ALTER TABLE )


Indeed, I've been wondering why this information isn't available. :-(

--
Knut Stolze
DB2 Information Integration Development
IBM Germany
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:15 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.2.0
www.UnixAdminTalk.com