It may be necessary to reorganize rule containers if the following conditions apply:
There is at least one secondary container.
The primary container or a secondary container other than the last one in the sequence is not completely full.
Users themselves are responsible for reorganizing the names and contents of rule containers. This procedure may involve a number of operations.
The examples below illustrate a procedure which prevents the undesired assignment of default values during reorganization:
Example 1
One follow-up container fewer will be required thanks to the improved distribution of rules within the active container sequence SYS.UDF - SYS.UDF2:
Initially, the first rule of the first secondary container SYS.UDF1 is inserted after the last rule of the primary container SYS.UDF. It is then deleted from SYS.UDF1.
|
This means that there is now room for a new rule in rule container SYS.UDF1.
This is filled with the first, and in this case, only rule in the next secondary container SYS.UDF2.
/add-default-protection-rule rule-container-guard=sys.udf1, -/ protection-rule rule111, ...
The rule is then deleted in SYS.UDF2. This also automatically deletes the rule container since it contains no further rules.
/remove-default-protection-rule rule-container-guard = sys.udf2, -/ protection-rule= rule111, ...
During the entire reorganization process, the sequence of rules remains unchanged. The fact that certain rules were duplicated at times has no effect on evaluation.
Example 2
In an active rule container sequence SYS.UDF - SYS.UDF3, the secondary container SYS.UDF1 contains only a single rule which is to be removed. Since the entire rule container is deleted when the last rule is deleted, it is necessary to prevent the interruption of the name sequence so that the rule containers SYS.UDF2 and
SYS.UDF3 continue to be interpreted as active follow-up containers .
The rule container SYS.UDF2, which in the rule container sequence is located immediately after SYS.UDF1 which is to be deleted, is copied in such a way that it replaces the container which is to be removed.
/copy-guard from-guard=sys.udf2,to-guard=sys.udf1,replace-old-guard=*yes
The rule container SYS.UDF2 is now superfluous. It is replaced by the next rule container in the sequence
/copy-guard from-guard=sys.udf3,to-guard=sys.udf2,replace-old-guard=*yes
Rule container SYS.UDF3 is now superfluous and can be deleted since no further containers follow it in the sequence.
/delete-guard guard-name=sys.udf3
