From Newsgroup: comp.sys.ibm.as400.misc

Some time back, I seem to recall a possible performance issue with long DB2 table names above a certain length. I can't recall what the performance problem was, and I also can't remember what the threshold name length was.
I want to say it was around 35 characters, but I don't have a high degree
of confidence in that.

Does this ring a bell with anyone?
--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.ibm.as400.misc

On 10/24/2019 4:25 PM, Jonathan Ball wrote:

Some time back, I seem to recall a possible performance issue with long DB2 table names above a certain length.-a I can't recall what the performance problem was, and I also can't remember what the threshold name length was.
I want to say it was around 35 characters, but I don't have a high degree
of confidence in that.

Does this ring a bell with anyone?

Right after I hit Send, I had a sudden flash that the issue possibly arose
due to long column names, rather than long table names.
--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.ibm.as400.misc

When accessing your table are you using SQL or System Naming Conventions?
Do you qualify your table or not?

When using system naming conventions and unqualified access, the short system names are used, i.e. they must be first determined from the long column names.
... but it should not cause a performance issue.

Birgitta
--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2