|
This is a formula for disaster. You run the risk of "posting a debit
without a credit", and journaling in necessary. In normal operations, if a job happens to blow up in the middle between files, then yes. It is probably a good idea in general but we haven't taken the step in mass yet. It would probably help with resolving data issues but I don't want to get into a lenghty discussion. We do journal some files and we may journal more if this becomes an issue. We may journal in mass, I don't know. Backups are also a low probability of out of sync data for us. I won't drag out the details but the basics are: 1. Get a list of interactive users with locks then send them a message about signing out. Wait some time for jobs to end. 2. Kill all jobs at once with a lock on the library being saved except MSGW jobs. Wait some more time for jobs to die. 3. ALCOBJ *EXCL WAIT(0) on every file in the library. If any errors other than CPF0944, get a list of jobs holding the locks and kill them. Anything afterwards should either be ending or in MSGW. 4. SAVLIB SAVACT(*NO). This will wait two minutes on some objects if jobs are still dying. The only objects not saved are locks from the MSGW jobs. So, what happens if we change from SAVACT(*NO) to SAVACT(*SYSDFN) in V5R4 to get the missing MSGW locked data? Any longer saves? Any missed objects? Thanks for your input! Craig
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.