Skip to Main Content
IBM Power Ideas Portal

This portal is to open public enhancement requests against IBM Power Systems products, including IBM i. To view all of your ideas submitted to IBM, create and manage groups of Ideas, or create an idea explicitly set to be either visible by all (public) or visible only to you and IBM (private), use the IBM Unified Ideas Portal (

Shape the future of IBM!

We invite you to shape the future of IBM, including product roadmaps, by submitting ideas that matter to you the most. Here's how it works:

Search existing ideas

Start by searching and reviewing ideas and requests to enhance a product or service. Take a look at ideas others have posted, and add a comment, vote, or subscribe to updates on them if they matter to you. If you can't find what you are looking for,

Post your ideas
  1. Post an idea.

  2. Get feedback from the IBM team and other customers to refine your idea.

  3. Follow the idea through the IBM Ideas process.

Specific links you will want to bookmark for future use

Welcome to the IBM Ideas Portal ( - Use this site to find out additional information and details about the IBM Ideas process and statuses.

IBM Unified Ideas Portal ( - Use this site to view all of your ideas, create new ideas for any IBM product, or search for ideas across all of IBM. - Use this email to suggest enhancements to the Ideas process or request help from IBM for submitting your Ideas.

Status Not under consideration
Workspace IBM i
Categories Db2 for i
Created by Guest
Created on Jan 12, 2017

api QDBRTVSN response time too long

I have a security feature based on library and group profile of the current users. the application is a very intensive client-access application.
more than 18000 sql for the main job for a duration of 4 minutes 51 seconds.
the feature retrieve Library of SQL objects with the API QDVBRTVSN.
this APi calls one server job (QDBSRVXR) that cannot answer to a so high number of requests

Can you adapt the number of servers to the system workload ?

Use Case:

allow a security feature based on library (system name) of SQL objects to answer

Idea priority Urgent
  • Guest
    May 14, 2020

    IBM does not intend to provide a solution to this request at this time, so it is being closed.

    As mentioned in a prior update, the performance of the API is optimized to work with names 30 characters or less. Using longer names has a recognized performance cost that we do not plan to address.

  • Guest
    Mar 19, 2019

    The knowledge Center currently explains that long names have some performance ramifications in section
    "Effects on database performance when using long object names".
    However, the information is not specific enough. The next update of the information will be enhanced as follows:

    Long object names are converted internally to system object names when used in SQL statements. This
    conversion can have some performance impacts. Names of tables, views, indexes, and aliases that are 30 bytes or less
    will generally perform much better names longer than 30 bytes.

    Qualify the long object name with a library name, and the conversion to the short name happens at
    precompile time. In this case, there is less performance impact when the statement is executed. Otherwise,
    the conversion is done at execution time, and has a small performance impact.

  • Guest
    Mar 1, 2019

    Please respond to the question from COMMON Americas Advisory Council (CAAC) in the Comment below.

  • Guest
    Feb 19, 2019

    The CAAC has reviewed this RFE. More information is needed. Please let us know your response to Mark Anderson's comments below. In particular, how did your lengths compare with the best practices recommendation of 30 or fewer characters?

    Background: The COMMON Americas Advisory Council (CAAC) members have a broad range of experience in working with small and medium-sized IBM i customers. CAAC has a key role in working with IBM i development to help assess the value and impact of individual RFEs on the broader IBM i community, and has therefore reviewed your RFE.

    For more information about CAAC, see

    For more details about CAAC's role with RFEs, see

    Nancy Uthke-Schmucki - CAAC Program Manager

  • Guest
    Feb 7, 2019

    FYI, for tables whose names are less than 31 bytes, the very first time the API is used for a specific table may take longer, but subsequently, will be quite fast. Furthermore, even though such cases are already quite fast. I am planning to improve the case where names are less than 31 bytes even more.

  • Guest
    Feb 6, 2019

    As long as the length of "long names" for tables are less than 31 bytes, the performance is quite fast and we do not need to access the server job to find the short name. The best practice for performance reasons is to use "long names" whose length is less 31.