DataDeploy - What does IWOV_IDMAPS table do?

Snippet from the DataDeploy Admin Guide:

"To overcome the maximum database object name length imposed by database servers, DataDeploy builds a mapping table called IWOV_IDMAPS in the destination database. For each object name that exceeds the maximum length limit for the database, this mapping table establishes a relationship between the original object name and a generated name onforming to the database’s object name length limits. The generated name is then used in place of the original object ame in all database transactions. This implementation allows able names, column names, constraint names, and viewnames to contain any number of characters................."

Hope that helps.

Hi,

In my destination database it is creating
IWTRACKER,IWOVIDMAPS and IWTEMP_124DA2CE like this i have IWTEMP_XXXX table around 20. Is there any reason why it is creating IWTEMP tables. Shall i delete these tables.

Could you pls. clarify me what are all these tables i am using dd5.6 with TS5.5.2.

Thanx in advance

If your table names are longer than that supported by the database vendor DD generates a new table name and uses the IWOV_IDMAPS to map the long table names to short DD generated table names. DD also creates some temp tables for sorting etc... You could remove the temp tables but not the tables in IWOV_IDMAPS nor the tables IWTRACKER iWOVIDMAPS, and IWDELTRACKER

The IWOV_IDMAPS table, as stated in other posts, is used to map the very long identifiers that DataDeploy likes to use to short versions that are of legal length to you database. This applies to Table Names, Column Names, View Names, etc etc etc. Any identifier used in your database that is longer than the maximum length will get shortened and mapped in the IWOV_IDMAPS table.

-------------------------------
E-Mail : farnsaw@stonedoor.com

This does not apply for column names.

OK -

I am using DD 6.0.1, and don't want IWOV_IDMAPS to be created at all. It seems to do this by default. I am trying to execute a standalone deployment. My table names are definitely not too long. I am hitting an MS SQL 2000 database. Anyone know if you can force IWOV_IDMAPS to not be created?

bump

bump ?

For some reason, on standalone deployments ,DD wants to create IWOV_IDMAPS. Why is this?

I created the table manually, but it still complains.

Any ideas here?

IIRC (click here for more information on IIRC), DD checks to see if IWOV_IDMAPS exists, if it does not, it will try to create it.

What does it complain about ? Post the details.

Here is my log:

DD Smiley Very Happy

atabase Vendor set to microsoft-inetuna
DD:Max Identifier length set to 128 characters.
DD Smiley Frustrated

QL datatype for column deptId is VARCHAR2(250)
DD Smiley Frustrated

QL datatype for column name is VARCHAR2(250)
DD:# of columns: 2
DD:# of primary key columns specified: 1
DD:WARNING:Assuming group name as the table name for [deptRecords].
DD:# of groups defined in <dbschema> element: 1
DD:[Tue Mar 29 15:12:24 EST 2005] Begin executing deployment1
DD:Area VPath Smiley Very Happy

:\PROGRA~1\INTERW~1\OPENDE~1\examples\conf-dd\tutorial\data
DD Smiley Frustrated

etting up TDbSchemaAgent.
DD:Validating cached connection...
DD:Cached connection OK
DD:Connected to [lbpdmkwm03:1433?database=Publication]
DD:Building mappings cache...
DD:
DD:*******************************************************
DD Smiley Frustrated

QLException occured in TIdentifierMappingTable::BuildMappingCache()
DD:Exception Message: [LBPDMKWM03]Invalid object name 'IWOV_IDMAPS'.
DD:Vendor Error Code: 208
DD Smiley Frustrated

QL state: S0002
DD:*******************************************************
DD:
DD:*******STACK TRACE*************
java.sql.SQLException: [LBPDMKWM03]Invalid object name 'IWOV_IDMAPS'.
at com.inet.tds.e.a(Unknown Source)
at com.inet.tds.b.new(Unknown Source)
at com.inet.tds.b.byte(Unknown Source)
at com.inet.tds.b.executeQuery(Unknown Source)
at com.interwoven.dd100.dd.TIdentifierMappingTable.BuildMappingCache(TIdentifierMappingTable.java:584)
at com.interwoven.dd100.dd.TIdentifierMappingTable.<init>(TIdentifierMappingTable.java:119)
at com.interwoven.dd100.dd.TDbAgent.<init>(TDbAgent.java:285)
at com.interwoven.dd100.dd.TDbSchemaAgent.<init>(TDbSchemaAgent.java:63)
at com.interwoven.dd100.dd.TConsumerManager.getDbAgentBasedOnGroupUpdate(TConsumerManager.java:513)
at com.interwoven.dd100.dd.TConsumerManager.SetupConsumer(TConsumerManager.java:586)
at com.interwoven.dd100.dd.TConsumerManager.SetupConsumersForOneDeployment(TConsumerManager.java:191)
at com.interwoven.dd100.dd.TConsumerManager.SetupConsumers(TConsumerManager.java:133)
at com.interwoven.dd100.dd.TAgentClient.Go(TAgentClient.java:97)
at com.interwoven.dd100.dd.IWDataDeploy.Go(IWDataDeploy.java:512)
at com.interwoven.dd100.dd.TWorkItem.DoIt(TWorkItem.java:165)
at com.interwoven.dd100.dd.TLonelyWorker.run(TLonelyWorker.java:52)

I created IWOV_IDMAPS manually, but DD is still trying to create it. Don't know why this would be happening ...

I am no DBA, but something tells me the error is NOT due to the fact that DD is trying to create table.

Is the table empty or has any records ? What happens if you insert some (dummy) record into it ?
Are you sure that you have (manually) created the table exactly as DD expects it to be ? Including the columns, owner, etc. ?

I never understood this obsession of DBAs to re-invent the wheel and create the IWOV_IDMAPS and IWTRACKER tables manually. Let DD create it, let it be happy and work as its designed. Whats the big deal ?

Ottawa_IWOV - not picking on you.. just my observations over the years...

I am no DBA. But, OUR DBA, only wants the user responsible for connecting with DD to have certains priviliedges, one of the NOT being create.

Therefore, thought I would create the table manually and go from there ...

Arc

IWOV_IDMAPS is created by default by DD. Looks like you have not created the table, exactly like DD does.
For Standalone Deployments this table is not needed, and can be dropped from the DB. Thats what we have done.