I haven't tested this recently...
but we decided to NOT do SAVCHGOBJ as it took 90% of the time that
SAVLIB did, so we only do SAVLIB (years ago, on a much smaller ibm i)...
---however we do save_while_active --- and once in a blue moon,
we skip an object because other things went wrong....
On 4/24/2014 3:22 PM, Briggs, Trevor (TBriggs2) wrote:
<SNIP> If your nightly saves are change only then dropping the weekly is
going to cause you to keep quite a few more tapes around for recovery
and I'm doubtful that a recovery test would be successful.<SNIP>
I don't follow this logic. Change-only saves are cumulative, they save
everything that's changed since the last full backup, so you only ever
need the latest one, surely? The downside is that the longer you go
between full saves the longer the change-only saves will take.
[mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jim Oberholtzer
Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2014 4:16 PM
To: 'Midrange Systems Technical Discussion'
Subject: RE: comfort level in not performing TAPE backups...
If you use BRMS, no problem you'll still be able to recover since BRMS
manage the expiration of tapes etc.
If your nightly saves are change only then dropping the weekly is going
cause you to keep quite a few more tapes around for recovery and I'm
doubtful that a recovery test would be successful. At some point during
week you'll need a full save, which can still be save while active, but
full as opposed to an incremental.
The restricted state save, meaning including IBM i LIC and OS is only
needed after applying PTF groups/cumulative. I would argue that an *IBM
save should be done at least once a month, and always after an
PTF or groups are applied, but I've seen customers where the frequency
to be shorter since they change parameters on various LPPs during the
Bottom line is design your recovery process, then build the back up to
Chief Technical Architect
Agile Technology Architects
[mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gqcy
Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2014 2:15 PM
Subject: comfort level in not performing TAPE backups...
I have re-composed this email several times now...
it kept winding up as a pro - con list...
Our IT shop (mostly windows servers, with a small IBM i) has been
away from tape for some time.
3 years ago we stopped our nightly IBM i backups to physical tape, and
to a product that exported save files to SAN. we did physical tape spins
we are now in a full HA/DR protection scenario, and are progressing to
performing our nightly backups on the DR box, NOT the source box...
I am ok with this...
Now, I am being tasked to stop the weekend tape spins now as well,
for a "month end" full system save tape to be done on Source system.
I need to ask....
Am I going too far down the trail getting away from tape on the IBM i?
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx To subscribe,
or change list options,
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx Before posting, please take a
moment to review the archives at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.