Re: Multiple libraries to a *SAVF?

["John Earl" <john.earl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Dan,

> Kirk wrote:
> > John, could someone just RSTOBJ the individual (internal) savf
> >and then do the RSTLIB to get the desired lib? This would speed
> >things up and take a lot less space.
>
> Then John wrote:
> >Yes.  All the regular RSTOBJ and RSTLIB rules still apply.  You
> >just get around the "1 lib per savf" restriction by consolidating
> >savf's in another library.
>
> I musta missed something.  If one needs to restore saved objects from a
save
> file that stored in another save file, don't they have to restore the save
> file, and then do another restore from that save file?  How does that
speed
> things up?
>
> Is it really worth the time to consolidate multiple save files into one?
> Not to mention the potential to not have enough disk space to restore a
> large consolidated save file to a system, and then restore from that save
> file.

I've never done this for the sake of speed, though Evan's comments on the
subject are interesting.    And yes many people will have Disk space
limitations.  But he benefit of doing multiple library saves to a single
save file is that you can then send that save file over a network easily.
If you are a product vendor, you can now deliver your multiple library
solution over the web (we do that now).  If you have a network of iSeries,
you have a method of sending entire applications intact to secondary boxes,
you can even do offsite storage more quickly if you have a big pipe and a
remote system with large disk capacity.  Heck, if you have the disk space
and the bandwidth, you could conveivably back up an entire application and
then ftp it to an offsite PC for remote data storage capabilities.

So, lot's of reasons to do this.  Speed isn't one that ever occuured to me.

jte


>
>