I've been having some discussions recently with various folks about whether
or not a system manager (SM capability) is also a valid DBA. This applies
mostly within the Allbase context, but also within the Image/SQL context.
Here is my central concern:
I need (as a System Manager) to examine every Image/SQL database on the
system to see if there are any attached Allbase DBEs. Likewise, I need to
examine every Allbase DBE on the system to see if there are any attached
Image databases. The tool for this is IMAGESQL.PUB.SYS
Within IMAGESQL I can:

DISPLAY TURBODB FOR <allbasename>,MAINT=<maintenance word>
Or
DISPLAY SQLDBES FOR <imagename>,MAINT=<maintenance word>

As long as I know the maintenance word, this works fine and dandy. If I
don't know the maintenance word, I can use either SQLUTIL or DBUTIL to find
it out (provided I have SM), and then supply it as requested.
However, if the database creator (frequently me, too!) has not provided a
maintenance word, the commands in IMAGESQL fail, for one of 2 reasons:

DISPLAY SQLDBES FOR <imagename>
Maintenance word not specified (ACTERR 324030
Or
DISPLAY SQLDBES FOR <imagename>,MAINT=
Syntax error (ATCERR 32435)

Arguments FOR the SM being a valid DBA
1. I have already demonstrated my ability to discover the maintenance word,
if any.
2. I have supplied every bit if information about the maintenance word that
the DBA could provide (ie that it does not exist!)
3. It is not a syntax error, but a semantic error. The syntax is deficient
in that it can not accommodate the apparent desire of the DBC not to have a
maintenance word.

Arguments against the SM being a valid DBA
1. That's the way it is (actually used!)
2. Omitting a maintenance word implies that the DBC specifically wants to
disable non DBC access.

I can buy the second one more easily than the first! However, both are
seriously flawed arguments. If as SM I can see the maintenance word or lack
thereof, and am then bound by the hypothetical desire of the DBC, I should
not be able to do anything else to the database. However, I can consistently
manage the database (at least for DISPLAY type purposes) using DBUTIL or
SQLUTIL as appropriate, without providing the maintenance word. So the fact
is that ISN'T the way it is, and the wish of the DBC if indeed that was the
wish, is being flouted!

Why all this?
I'd like to see the ability within IMAGESQL to do the DISPLAY commands
without a maintenance word if there is no maintenance word. In other words,
if there is no maintenance word on the database allow the command to
succeed. Either by supplying the null value, or by being smart enough to
figure out that it is not necessary!

How says the list?

Tony

PS And can we get this considered for the Image/Allbase enhancement list? I
have several thousand databases that are languishing because I can not
manually sign on to all of their accounts!