ALLOW (SOME) UTILITIES TO OPERATE ON TABLESPACE TABLE NAME

I would like it to be easier for developers or other end-users to more easily use some basic Db2 utilities.

• For example, RUNSTATS or RECOVER with redirected recover functionality. But any utility that only operates on tablespace today, consider allow user to specify "TABLESPACE TABLE schema1.tb1" instead of "TABLESPACE db1.ts1"

This will minimize the necessity of the end-user (developers, programmers, application support) to know technical details such as tablespace name.

The end-users often know table name, but they don’t know about the tablespace name. And they often don’t really care about tablespace name.

I feel this change of utility parameter option, to allow specification of TABLESPACE TABLE tabname, will make life easier for them. And they won’t need to bother me (the application Db2Z DBA) for assistance. I want them to become more self sufficient and faster. I don't want to be a bottleneck!

Of course, this new possibility should only be allowed for universal tablespaces.

• All us Db2 Z customers are V12 and V13 now. Most of us Db2 Z customers have converted all our important and actually-used tablespaces to universal type. And universal has one to one relationship with table name. So a utility statement specifying table name in the utility statement makes it obvious which underlying tablespace is involved

There are several end-user scenarios where this would be useful and simplify life

1. The developer knows they significantly changed the data in a table. They know enough to want to update statistics but they forget the tablespace name. instead of “RUNSTATS TABLESPACE db1.ts1” they could use “RUNSTATS TABLESPACE TABLE schema1.tb1”

2. Db2 Z DDL allows for super easy creation of a new table that like some existing table > “CREATE TABLE tb2 LIKE schema1.tb1”. This is very useful. We then know the new table and its gets a new implicitly defined tablespace (we don't know the ts name). I do this all the time. We don’t really care about the new ts name. But if I want to use RUNSTATS or redirected recovery on the new table then I have to look up the implicit tablespace name (the weird ts name. I don't really want to care about the ts name). It would be nice easy if we could just create the new table and then quickly do the recover into the new table from the old tb image copy. Often, after the" created like" table is used for a bit, then we drop it. Easy. But the utilities on it are a pain.

I think this might make utilities less frightful to end-users like developers.

Basically, I think this could be a low-cost or low-effort change by IBM for Db2 utilities. If it is easy for some utilities or all then just go for it and make life easier. If it is difficult change (for reasons that I cannot see) then do not implement this idea.

I have not thought about the impact to listdef. It make building listdefs easier for some people...