Re: Save While Active

["Eric Graeb" <eric_graeb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

    If you have the disk space might I also suggest doing a save to a *SAVF
instead and saving that to tape.  The slow part of a backup is generally the
communication with the tape drive.  I implemented this in one shop and
dropped our backup time drastically.  The save to tape then only needs
dedicated access to the *SAVF and can been run in the middle of the day if
you want.  The disadvantage of course is you have to run 2 restores.  One to
restore the *SAVF and one to restore from the *SAVF.
    This would be a more dependable backup then the save while active.
Saving files while in use can be a problem when it comes to a restore.  In a
properly set up database each table is not an entity onto itself.  Hence the
restore may create "Orphaned" records.  To prevent this the save while
active requires a lot of monitoring and can't be used as your sole recovery
method.  With good journaling and perhaps a main backup once per week you
may be able to get it to work for you though.

Eric Graeb
AS/400 Administrator
King Optical Group Inc.


> I need to reduce my outage for backups.  I've been looking at the Save
> While Active as an option.  Is there any 'gotcha's' that anyone is aware
> of.  My understanding is it will lock the files until the point of
> commitment and then dump to tape.  Any changes that are made are then
> applied to the different files.  What is the impact on restores?  How
about
> performance?  Disk space?   I appreciate any information anyone can
> provide.
>
> Thanks for the help!
>
>
> Cheryl Bisson
> ACTS Testing
>