Re: Replication Opinions

[Michael Ryan <michaelrtr@xxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks Chris, and thanks for the 'field level update' explanation. I like that.

- Michael

On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 9:55 AM, Chris Bipes <chris.bipes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Remote journaling is the MY preferred method as it is still be supported
> and enhanced by IBM.
>
> Trigger with local data queue to post changes and program on remote end
> reading a TCP/IP DDM Remote data queue is my second choice.
>
> I also like to perform what I call field level updates.
>
> Chain to local file with lock for update.  Compare before and after
> value of field, if changed, compare before and current value of field.
> If the same, change current to after value, if not, log the three values
> into an audit / error file and skip update of that field. Update record.
>
> Rinse and repeat for each field in the file.
>
> Of course a delete is just that a keyed delete, no reason to read the
> local file. And an insert is just a write to the file.
>
> --
> Chris Bipes
> Director of Information Services
> CrossCheck, Inc.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Michael Ryan
> Sent: Friday, January 07, 2011 5:49 AM
> To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
> Subject: Re: Replication Opinions
>
> Great replies folks...thanks very much. I need to replicate the
> changes on a near real-time basis, so a once a day file transfer won't
> work for me. I've written code in the past to handle updates with the
> remote journaling, so I may resurrect that code and modify it to fit
> the current needs. MQ is licensed to one of the systems but not the
> other, so that's probably not going to help. The budget is probably
> just person hours - no room for package software.
>
> What are folks thoughts about the continuing use of DDM? I just seem
> to shy away from it anymore. I know it's still viable in a TCP/IP
> environment, but I find it's not my first thought when it comes to
> remote file access. I'd rather have some SQL code embedded in my
> program that processes a remote connect and accesses the data that
> way. Of course, that's not a good option when needing to access both
> remote data and local data.
>
> --
> 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.