Subject: Deprecated DB2 TABLE/TABLESPACES regarding ARS INDEX TABLES

Problem Description:
This week, the DB2 DBA's brought up the topic of old Tablespace constructs being deprecated.  Looks like all of the recently defined Index Data tables are being defined with Supported constructs.  Older Index Data tables were defined with constructs identified as Deprecated. 
Will this Impact Production Support without Upgrading these Objects?  Do they need to be upgraded to be properly supported?  Same with the Indexes associated to these Tables/Tablespaces.

Note:  This answer was provided by Db2 Support.  If you have a question contact Db2 support, not CMOD support.

Note:  This is all unofficial information unless promulgated via an IBM announcement

If you create the objects with APPLCOMPAT  level V13R1M503 or lower then you can create deprecated objects.  If you are using SPUFI or DSNTIAD or DSNTEP2 then you would need to bind those plans with APPLCOMAT(V13R1M503)  or lower.



Note, however,  that Db2 VNext will not support the following:

Simple, segmented or classic partitioned tablespaces;

BRF or basic (6 byte) format pagesets;

hash pagesets;

synonyms;

VTAM connectivity.



You have till approx. 2031 till V13 will be out of support.

_________________________________________________

Follow-on question:

All of the Index tables after 2019 seem to be created ok(partition by growth), but we have 2900+ tables that are Simple tables (TYPE of SPACE).  39 of them are ARS* SYSTEM TABLES.   All need to be converted before 2031, right?  Don't want to wait until the "last minute".
_________________________________________________

Reply from Db2:

>  All need to be converted before 2031, right?

Yes.
 

System requirements for IBM® Content Manager OnDemand beginning with version 10.5.0.11

Ref:  https://www.ibm.com/support/pages/node/7249695

Abstract
This document describes the system requirements for IBM® Content Manager OnDemand beginning with version 10.5.0.11, which is planned for 3Q2026.

Content
Note:  When a product version is specified as 'or later', it refers to later fix packs of the version that is specified, as well as any later versions (and fix packs) that are not specified. In addition, if a product is not listed, that does not mean that the product is no longer supported. Rather, it means that the prerequisite version of the product will not be changed.
 

IBM z/OS
     3.1 or later

AIX
     7.2 TL5 or later, and 7.3 TL3 or later

Linux (Intel and System z)
     RedHat 8 U10 or later, RH 9 U6 or later, and RH 10 or later
     SUSE 15 SP7 or later, and SUSE 16 or later

Microsoft Windows Server
     Windows Server 2025 or later

Microsoft Windows (for Content Manager OnDemand client programs that run on a workstation)
     Windows 11 or later

IBM Db2 for z/OS
     13 or later

IBM Db2 for Linux, UNIX and Windows
     11.5 or later

Microsoft SQL Server
     2022 or later

IBM Storage Protect
     8.1.26 or later

IBM WebSphere Liberty
     25.0.0.9 or later
 

In addition, the following product components are not planned to ship with Content Manager OnDemand version 10.5.0.11 and later. Note that all of these components have supported 64-bit equivalents that will continue to be provided.
               - OnDemand Windows Client (32-bit)
               - OnDemand Windows Administrator (32-bit)
               - OnDemand Windows Monitor (32-bit)
               - Content Manager OnDemand Web Enablement Kit (ODWEK) Java APIs (32-bit)
               - ARSACIF (32-bit; Multiplatforms only)

CMOD V10.5.0.11 will require z/OS V3.1

System requirements for IBM® Content Manager OnDemand beginning with version 10.5.0.11

Ref:  https://www.ibm.com/support/pages/node/7249695

Abstract
This document describes the system requirements for IBM® Content Manager OnDemand beginning with version 10.5.0.11, which is planned for 3Q2026.

Content
Note:  When a product version is specified as 'or later', it refers to later fix packs of the version that is specified, as well as any later versions (and fix packs) that are not specified. In addition, if a product is not listed, that does not mean that the product is no longer supported. Rather, it means that the prerequisite version of the product will not be changed.
 

IBM z/OS
     3.1 or later

AIX
     7.2 TL5 or later, and 7.3 TL3 or later

Linux (Intel and System z)
     RedHat 8 U10 or later, RH 9 U6 or later, and RH 10 or later
     SUSE 15 SP7 or later, and SUSE 16 or later

Microsoft Windows Server
     Windows Server 2025 or later

Microsoft Windows (for Content Manager OnDemand client programs that run on a workstation)
     Windows 11 or later

IBM Db2 for z/OS
     13 or later

IBM Db2 for Linux, UNIX and Windows
     11.5 or later

Microsoft SQL Server
     2022 or later

IBM Storage Protect
     8.1.26 or later

IBM WebSphere Liberty
     25.0.0.9 or later
 

In addition, the following product components are not planned to ship with Content Manager OnDemand version 10.5.0.11 and later. Note that all of these components have supported 64-bit equivalents that will continue to be provided.
               - OnDemand Windows Client (32-bit)
               - OnDemand Windows Administrator (32-bit)
               - OnDemand Windows Monitor (32-bit)
               - Content Manager OnDemand Web Enablement Kit (ODWEK) Java APIs (32-bit)
               - ARSACIF (32-bit; Multiplatforms only)

This thread is current.

No reported z/OS 3.1 issues found by CMOD.

Note:  CMOD 10.5.0.11 will require z/OS 3.1 or later

CMOD has surfaced the follow Db2 defect:


PH68886: Db2 FOR z/OS ODBC TRACED THE BIGINT VALUE INCORRECTLY

Error description
When BIGINT is in use, the Db2 for z/OS ODBC application trace shows an incorrect value.

At the moment there's only one supported level of CMOD and it's quite mature.

When CMOD V.Next comes out I suspect activity will pick up as people start to migrate to the new version.

Ed Arnold

At a minimum I'd like to see this website continue.

I like the ability to publish items that I think are of interest to the CMOD community.

Ed Arnold

Broadly speaking, I advise *against* using AI/LLM output for anything important.  I've had a few occasions where people have written to me, letting me know that machine generated summaries (of information clearly found on the Forums or Wiki) were not accurate.  I informed them to use the source itself and not summaries, because I can't stop LLMs from generating garbage output.

I will *also* say that many, many folks have moved on -- I haven't counted the full total yet, but I'm going to estimate I have nearly 100 eMail bounces waiting for me to deal with.

EDIT:  About 10% of eMails were bounces, or recipients asked to be removed from the Forums, we've got a little over 800 users, down from a high of around 1100.

-JD.

I have come to the site looking for similar experiences I have, but it is not frequent. I have not played with chatgpt or copiot to see how accurate those are in assessing and resolving questions.

I know every sort of conference and travel suffered a lot with budget constraints. I miss the days of what ODUG started out as but nothing good lasts forever. I know the user group, if it continues, will not be what it once was. I'm not even sure how many of those I met thru the user group are still with ODUG. I would continue to use the forum if it stays around.