swift99
asked on
JBuilder gurus: Configuration problem with DB2 on MVS and Jbuilder 8
I am having a problem configuring the JBuilder IDE EJB Designer tool to recognize the tables in a DB2 database hosted on MVS. We have had no problems getting the DatabasePilot tool to work correctly, and we are using exactly the same configuration.
The symptoms are as follows:
1. Connection is established correctly
2. Download of table names proceeds in same time as DatabasePilot
3. Of 3200 +/- tables, only one is displayed. It is a temp table with a creator = my user ID.
4. No exceptions are displayed, and there are no issues noted when we run in verbose mode.
Database pilot tool shows all 3200 +/- tables correctly with identical configuration.
Any ideas? What are we missing?
The symptoms are as follows:
1. Connection is established correctly
2. Download of table names proceeds in same time as DatabasePilot
3. Of 3200 +/- tables, only one is displayed. It is a temp table with a creator = my user ID.
4. No exceptions are displayed, and there are no issues noted when we run in verbose mode.
Database pilot tool shows all 3200 +/- tables correctly with identical configuration.
Any ideas? What are we missing?
Hm. the EJB Designer might check if the user connecting has appropriate rights to perform whatever operation the EJB Designer might want to on the tables.
Have you tried this with super-user privileges on DB2?
Have you tried this with super-user privileges on DB2?
ASKER
That was our first thought. We all have the necessary priveleges on the development database.
If we did not have the necessary priveleges then our workaround would not work.
It looks like the Borland engineers tried to filter the tables down and just went one step too far, filtering by owner in their query. When you have a couple of hundred developers you can't depend on the "owner" for anything but the initial creation.
Also, they never figured on a database schema as large as ours. Their designer tool has problems when there are that many tables. We don't have a commitment yet, but we are talking to Borland about some minor changes around the EJB Entity Bean designer to support our scale of system.
If we did not have the necessary priveleges then our workaround would not work.
It looks like the Borland engineers tried to filter the tables down and just went one step too far, filtering by owner in their query. When you have a couple of hundred developers you can't depend on the "owner" for anything but the initial creation.
Also, they never figured on a database schema as large as ours. Their designer tool has problems when there are that many tables. We don't have a commitment yet, but we are talking to Borland about some minor changes around the EJB Entity Bean designer to support our scale of system.
good luck then.
ASKER
Thanks ... we'll need it! :o)
swift99:
This old question needs to be finalized -- accept an answer, split points, or get a refund. For information on your options, please click here-> http:/help/closing.jsp#1
EXPERTS:
Post your closing recommendations! No comment means you don't care.
This old question needs to be finalized -- accept an answer, split points, or get a refund. For information on your options, please click here-> http:/help/closing.jsp#1
EXPERTS:
Post your closing recommendations! No comment means you don't care.
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
membership
This solution is only available to members.
To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.
No comment has been added lately, so it's time to clean up this TA.
I will leave a recommendation in the Cleanup topic area that this question is:
Question PAQed and Points refunded
Please leave any comments here within the next seven days.
PLEASE DO NOT ACCEPT THIS COMMENT AS AN ANSWER!
TimYates
EE Cleanup Volunteer
I will leave a recommendation in the Cleanup topic area that this question is:
Question PAQed and Points refunded
Please leave any comments here within the next seven days.
PLEASE DO NOT ACCEPT THIS COMMENT AS AN ANSWER!
TimYates
EE Cleanup Volunteer
ASKER
We figured out a workaround, but it's a real pain and seems to destabilize the IDE (maybe exposing a bug?).
Any one have some real solutions?