Re: Commitment Control

I agree.  Had an analyst accidentally blast 11,000 records.  Had we had 
this journaled it would have been a simple RMVJRNCHG to undelete all these 
records.  However, this is one thing I cannot convince management on. 
Their last dying defense is that we will be getting a HA solution this 
year and won't that do some journalling and can we use that, and if so, 
why duplicate the efforts?

Rob Berendt
-- 
Group Dekko Services, LLC
Dept 01.073
PO Box 2000
Dock 108
6928N 400E
Kendallville, IN 46755
http://www.dekko.com





Rob Dixon <rob.dixon@xxxxxxxxxxx> 
Sent by: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
05/07/2005 05:55 AM
Please respond to
Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>


To
Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
cc

Subject
Re: Commitment Control






Marc

Marc Rauzier wrote:

>IMHO, we should never have had another choice. I mean, commitment 
>control is mandatory to ensure database integrity from an application 
>point of view.
>
I entirely agree.  Also, in a disaster situation, recovery would be 
dramatically simpler with journalling & commitment control in use and a 
nightmare without. If you are not using journalling, you presumably have 
to do a full backup every night and so have to shut down the system, 
rather than just saving changed objects automatically at regular 
intervals throughout the day (say once every hour) whilst the system is 
running.

Rob

-- 
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing 
list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.