Re: Fast Copy File

[macwheel99@xxxxxxxxxx]

Is the copied information adequate to rebuild what's needed?
In some purchased software, we can have files without their source code.
Different LF might point at different mixtures of members.

If the purpose of the TEST copy is for testing, then there are two other 
considerations.
1. A sub-set of the total production file, that is representative of all 
kinds of data in the production copy, can support good testing, without the 
same overhead.
2.  The reason for testing is that we expect things to fail, so we can fix 
them, before they do any damage.  Make sure you have good security, and/or 
replace  identity-theft data in the test data base with dummy data that 
meets the field validation needs.

On Wed, 12 Nov 2008 14:11:43 -0600, sjl wrote
> All -
>
> We were having difficulties when refreshing data libraries in our 
> test environments due to the long time it was taking to rebuild the 
> logical files over the physical files.
>
> I determined that it was much more efficient to first /remove/ the 
> LF members from the logical files in the to-library /before/ doing 
> the CPYF command, then submitting jobs to add back the LF members 
> once the PF was copied - thus was born a new command I call FASTCPYF.
>
> The underlying CPP for this command does the following:
>
> 1) DSPDBR of the PF in the to-library to an outfile to capture all 
> of the logical files that are dependent on the PF in the to-library 
> 2) DSPFD of the PF in the to-library TYPE(*TRG) to an outfile to 
> capture any triggers on the file in the to-library 
3) Removes all of 
> the LF members from the PF in the to-library 
4) Removes all of the 
> triggers from the PF in the to-library 
5) Uses CPYF to copy the from-
> file to the to-file 
6) Using the information from DSPDBR, submits 
> jobs to add back all of the logical file members to the PF in the to-
> library 
7) Using the information from DSPFD TYPE(*TRG), adds back 
> all of the triggers to the PF in the to-library
>
> Have I missed anything?
>
> > From my preliminary testing on a physical file that has a lot of logical 
> files, FASTCPYF can be 10 times faster than CPYF...
>
> - sjl
>
> -- 
> 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.


--
WOW! Homepage (http://www.wowway.com)