I understand Don's use of the word; it's pretty hard not to use the term
idiot if you've never had to rebuild a system you know nothing about and
start stumbling across stuff like this.
The IBM manual doesn't tell you to do a second restore - you have to "know"
to do it, which means looking ("hunting") in the joblogs to see what went
wrong. You can't just assume that an error on the restore was caused by
logical being in another library and that a second restore will just fix it.
For instance, what is to stop someone putting the journals and receivers in
a library called ZJOURNAL ? Now journaling is not started and I have to run
a STRJRNPF on files that should be journalled. Never happen you say ? I have
struck just this scenario so it is not a fantasy. Just because people should
have a documented recovery process doesn't mean they WILL have one.
The place for thinking about things like this is at the design stage not
when you are trying to do a recovery.
Just as an aside it's way different being called in as a consultant to
restore a system you know nothing about than it is to being an employee
having to recover your own system, particularly if you have a well-rehearsed
plan as you have, at whatever level the employee might be. The expectations
are generally much higher.
[mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of rob@xxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, 26 March 2008 8:17 a.m.
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
Subject: RE: PF
What hunt? Again, there is no hunt. There is no "etc". And you're
obviously letting it cause you stress when you use the term "idiot". It's
just a simple second restore with no specifying of any particular objects
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2019 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