Why wouldn't you do them both in batch ? (just curious)
I'll follow this thread with interest.
Regards Evan Harris
I'm going to change most backups to use a SWA scenario. In a SWA environment, you monitor a message queue for the checkpoint processing complete. Is there a preference to one of the following ways of doing it:
Option 1 ======== Controlling CL program - calls a CL to stop QINTER, jobqs, etc. - submits a job to QCTL that monitors the msgq for checkpoint (when reached, this submitted job restarts QINTER, etc) - performs the backup - done
Option 2 ======== Controlling CL program - calls a CL to stop QINTER, jobqs, etc. - submits a job to QCTL that performs the backup - monitors the msgq for checkpoint - restarts QINTER, etc - done
In option 1, the SAVxxx commands are done interactive with the msgq monitoring in batch.
In option 2, the msgq monitoring is done interactive with the SAVxxx commands in batch.
Is there a caveat to one or the other of these?
-- Jeff Crosby
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2014 by MIDRANGE dot COM and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available here. If you have questions about this, please contact