Re: Where is SAVRSTLIB? (Timing of SAVLIB/RSTLIB vs CPYLIB)

Hi Hoss

CPYLIB was part of the original post - it was reported as slower than
the SAVLIB/RSTLIB combination, because it uses CRTDUPOBJ for everything,
so has to do access path rebuilds and all. If the SAVLIB is done with
saving access paths, it'll definitely be faster. And the SAV/RST code
path is optimized for speed - really large page requests from disk, etc.

I've not tested the efficiency of SAVRSTLIB so can't confirm what
someone said, that the restore starts before the save is done - that
seems not possible, since a SAVF - if that's what is used in that set of
commands - has to be completed before it can be sent anywhere and
restored. But IBM do all manner of interesting things, sometimes.

Vern

On 9/13/2010 7:45 AM, Bruce Hoffman wrote:

or even cpylib...

On 09/13/2010 07:07 AM, Jim Oberholtzer wrote:

Sam,

Yes you could get it to work, but to what end? The process saves an
object (there are several SAVRSTxxx commands) sends it to another
machine using APPN communications, then restores the object. I don't
understand what the value is. If all you want is a copy of a
library(ies) then use a save file or virtual tape.

Jim Oberholtzer
CEO/Chief Technical Architect
Agile Technology Architects, LLC


On 9/11/2010 4:09 PM, Lennon_s_j@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

In my former job I was using SAVRSTLIB to send objects between testing
LPARs and I wasn't intimately involved with the communications setup. I
guess I assumed SAVRSTLIB was part of the operating system...

Now I'm on a single partition machine. If so, can I still use SAVRSTLIB
to make a copy of a library? I suspect not.