RE: Journaling not practical?!?!

James,

Take a look at the "Striving for Optimal Journal Performance" redbook.
http://www.redbooks.ibm.com/abstracts/sg246286.html

It's a little dated as it's from 2002, but if you want to talk about
journal on large systems:

"The end-of-day routine executes more than 400 application programs and
updates more than
100 of the 2000 journaled tables present in this shop. Banesco has 2000
journaled tables of
which 100 are heavily modified, all sent to the same journal, which
grows by 15GB during a
full two hour and 34 minute batch run.

The application programs are primarily written in RPG, with some
embedded SQL statements
and they perform tasks typical to a banking environment, for example
calculating interest on
savings and checking accounts, updating account balances, and so on.
Those batch jobs
also populate datamarts which are used in a data warehousing
environment. None of the
application programs that are executed as part of the end-of-day routine
uses commitment
control.

The end-of-day batch run typically generates in excess of 16 million
journal entries in a little
over two hours." 


Unless your customer is running at 95% CPU usage, they should be able to
implement journaling with little problem.  Depending on their DASD
usage, they might need some extra space but that's a small price to pay.



HTH,

Charles Wilt
--
iSeries Systems Administrator / Developer
Mitsubishi Electric Automotive America
ph: 513-573-4343
fax: 513-398-1121
  

> -----Original Message-----
> From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of James H 
> H Lampert
> Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 12:06 PM
> To: midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Journaling not practical?!?!
> 
> My fellow geeks:
> 
> We've got a customer claiming that their system is too 
> big, with too many sensitive files, to journal everything.
> 
> This sounds like a cop-out to me, particularly given that 
> IBM is actively encouraging users to journal EVERYTHING, 
> and that much of the SQL functionality won't even deal 
> with non-journaled files unless you explicitly tell it 
> it's OK to do so.
> 
> Could anybody suggest how or why this wouldn't be a 
> cop-out, and/or a polite way to tell them they're sucking 
> antimatter if they think journaling isn't practical?
> 
> --
> JHHL
> -- 
> 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.
> 
>