Re: Backup performance (CFINT)

[neilp@xxxxxxxxxxx]

There were PTF's issued for a problem where an active (signed on user's) message queue was not saved during backup.
What release are you running ?
Also, don't forget that not saving a message queue isn't a show stopper anyway.  If you had to restore from the backup, the message queue would be recreated the first time the user signed on anyway.  Chances are any messages in the message queue would be too old to be of use by then anyway.

Neil Palmer      DPS Data Processing Services Canada Ltd.
50 Acadia Avenue, Ste.102                   AS/400~~~~~
Markham, Ontario, Canada.   ____________          ___  ~     
Phone:(905) 474-4890 x303   |OOOOOOOOOO| ________  o|__||=   
Cell.:(416) 565-1682 x303   |__________|_|______|_|______)   
Fax:  (905) 474-4898         oo      oo   oo  oo   OOOo=o\   
mailto:NeilP@DPSlink.com  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 
http://www.DPSlink.com     iSeries 400  The Ultimate Business Server

Jeff Crosby <jlcrosby@fwi.com> Sent by: owner-midrange-l@midrange.com 2000/11/06 15:15 Please respond to MIDRANGE-L

To:        MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com         cc:                 Subject:        Re: Backup performance (CFINT)

rob@dekko.com wrote:
 
> Is there some other way to keep the operator appraised of the status?

Sure.  Send messages to QSYSOPR.  But as long as she is signed on, it
appears that the system cannot obtain a lock on her user profile msgq
for backing up.

Here's what I'm trying to do:  I have a message queue called BACKUPS. 
The various backups that I do (in batch) send progress messages to msgq
BACKUPS.  When the system operator is 'monitoring' the backup, her
interactive session is actually in a RCVMSG loop on msgq BACKUPS.  The
received messages are displayed as status messages on her display.  When
the batch job is complete, it sends a message of 'ENDBACKUP' to msgq
BACKUPS.  When the interactive job receives this message, it knows the
backup has completed normally.  What does this accomplish?  It allows
the operator to monitor the progress of the backup, yet keeps her from
being able (or tempted) to do work that could interfere with the backup.
 
> If this backup is running after hours when nobody is there I would believe
> that your interactive isn't really being taxed.

True, but it's a 3570 tape drive that my CISC 300-2042 cannot drive to
capacity.  I want the RISC 270-2250 to drive it to capacity as much as
possible, and this will be much more likely to happen in batch, IMO.  I
just want a way to:

                 1) Do the backup in batch.  (*ALLUSR libs with no misses on objects.)
                 2) Prevent the operator from doing other work while the backup is
running.
                 3) Provide a way for the operator to know the progress.

-- 
-Jeff
The opinions expressed are my own and not necessarily 
the opinion of my company.  Unless I say so.