Paul,
The omits are not the only thing that the BRMS GUI offers but the character
based interface does not, but I agree that's one of the most useful.
As to saving the IFS while active, that's a bust I agree. I usually just
exclude the logs etc. that would be recreated by the applications anyway,
and the files in the ADMIN server don't need to be backed up since
reinstalling them is a breeze if it's needed. When I ask the folks at IBM
if that will ever change they
There are a couple of pesky user spaces in IBM i that sometimes cause issues
as well. Again IBM i is smart enough to recreate them it they are lost so I
don't worry about them on a daily basis. Most folks do a full same
(sometime restricted) on the weekends where we catch most of those objects
in the restore strategy.
I'll talk about some of these topics in my BRMS Advanced session at the
COMMON Annual Meeting on Monday at 9:30am. I do a session on the graphical
interface a bit later in the day at 5:00pm.
For those interested BRMS, A powerful tool in Recoveries is more
introductory and is Monday at 8:00am
Deb Saugen also is doing several sessions and we tend to avoid overlap as
much as possible.
--
Jim Oberholtzer
Chief Technical Architect
Agile Technology Architects
-----Original Message-----
From: MIDRANGE-L [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Steinmetz, Paul
Sent: Thursday, April 09, 2015 9:08 AM
To: 'Midrange Systems Technical Discussion'
Subject: RE: save while active v7r1 - *IBM and also SAV
Jim,
I use BRMS with SWA, ASYNCBRING full production save of every library, every
night, starting at 10 pm, ending midnight, 2 hours.
There are additional features in BRMS GUI that you do not get in BRMS green
screen.
1) Additional SWA synchronize features.
2) GUI omits - specific objects
https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/community/wikis/home?lang=en#/wiki/IBM%20
Backup%2C%20Recovery%20and%20Media%20Services%20%28BRMS%29%20for%20i/page/We
lcome
10 *EXIT *******
20 *SAVSECDTA FFFFFFF *NO
30 *SAVCFG FFFFFFF *NO
40 *ALLUSR *SYSBAS FFFFFFF *ERR *YES QSYSOPR *NONE
50 *ALLDLO FFFFFFF *NO *YES
60 *LINK *ALLAVL FFFFFFF *NO *NO
70 *EXIT *******
No journaling.
Nothing ended.
Libraries never an issue, I still have IFS issues.
SWA does nothing for IFS, since there is no wait time on IFS objects.
Setting SWA for IFS can will actually make IFS save loner with no real
benefit.
How Save-While-Active on IFS (SAV) Works
https://www-304.ibm.com/support/entdocview.wss?uid=nas8N1012637
Total time for IFS save is 5 to 10 minutes If an IFS object is in use,
object is skipped.
Or, if the save grabs the IFS object, and an app needs it, the app usually
does fail.
I've determined that most IFS objects in use are temporary objects, better
to be skipped during save, causes less application issues.
We not only use the full back up for recovery purposes, but on an given
night immediately after the save, we restore our main application to any
one of 7 test/training/programming environments on a different LPAR. This is
also a good test of recovering our critical application.
Paul
-----Original Message-----
From: MIDRANGE-L [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Paul
Fenstermacher
Sent: Thursday, April 09, 2015 8:43 AM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
Subject: RE: save while active v7r1 - *IBM and also SAV
Jim, how about an informal evening session on PowerHA?
Paul Fenstermacher | Sys Admin, Sr | Corporate Systems - POWER Systems
Administration | Jack Henry & Associates, Inc.
663 West Highway 60 | Monett, MO 65708 | 417-235-4114 x177389 |
pfenstermacher@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
-----Original Message-----
From: MIDRANGE-L [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jim
Oberholtzer
Sent: Wednesday, April 8, 2015 5:17 PM
To: 'Midrange Systems Technical Discussion'
Subject: RE: save while active v7r1 - *IBM and also SAV
PowerHA does not use journaling at all in its replication, rather it copies
address blocks as the address block changes. So if address 1024 (and its 4K
block) is changed, the PowerHA takes that memory location and pushes it to
the remote site and applies it. PowerHA does not care what's in that block
of data, it just knows it needs to move.
PowerHA does have some limitations the biggest one being it replicated
Independent Axillary Storage Pools (iASP) and does not replicate some data
out of *SYSBAS.
Larry and I have been busily installing PowerHA over the last several months
at multiple customers. Done properly it is very easy.
As to the COMMON session Larry and I proposed one for this year but it was
not selected. Maybe next time.
--
Jim Oberholtzer
Chief Technical Architect
Agile Technology Architects
-----Original Message-----
From: MIDRANGE-L [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Horn,
Jim
Sent: Wednesday, April 08, 2015 5:05 PM
To: midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: save while active v7r1 - *IBM and also SAV
I haven't been responsible for this for a few years but - sounds like this
would make a good COMMON session.
In PowerHA do you need to be doing remote journaling?
Jim
----------------------------------------------------------------------
message: 1
date: Wed, 8 Apr 2015 14:39:14 -0500
from: "Jim Oberholtzer" <midrangel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
subject: RE: save while active v7r1 - *IBM and also SAV
Rob brings up a salient point. ALL of your applications should be
journaled, regardless of if you use them for commit control or not.
It aids in speedier recovery from an abnormal termination, it aids in
SWA, and if set up properly with system managed journals, does not
require significant administrative work to manage them. In a PowerHA
environment it's essential to ensure properly managed HA clusters.
(the same is true for the journal based replication packages)
Another way to get past most of the complexity is BRMS. BRMS manages
most of the issues with respect to SWA nicely. The small investment
in BRMS will pay for itself in administration time, and recoverability
in very short order.
Another reason to use journals is to mitigate the need for getting
checkpoints across multiple libraries at one time. Granted
referential integrity might not be perfect without a multiple library
checkpoint but using journaling by application rather than library
boundary goes a long way to making that technique acceptable.
Very few of my customers have environments were the near restricted
state (however short) to achieve a synchronization point is required,
rather by using BRMS and good use of journaling you can achieve 98% of
what you what without the shutdown pain.
--
Jim Oberholtzer
Chief Technical Architect
Agile Technology Architects
-----Original Message-----
From: MIDRANGE-L [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
rob@xxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, April 08, 2015 2:23 PM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
Subject: Re: save while active v7r1 - *IBM and also SAV
Jim,
I think you are a somewhat regular attendee of COMMON. That might be
a good place to really bone up.
Some search terms are: ragged save while active.
I think that might be the title of a redbook by Larry Youngren
With little to no journalling you may catch some grief.
Stream files are very picky and snicker at save while active.
Until we did the Mimix thing and started backing up from that we were
doing a crappy save while active. No checkpoint processing. No
journalling.
Didn't care if order header was in sync with order line, etc
SAVACT(*SYSDFN). The goal being: You can back up, just don't disrupt
the users from getting into the data. I argued against it but had to
bide my time until Mimix. Only took a few years...
Rob Berendt
--
IBM Certified System Administrator - IBM i 6.1 Group Dekko Dept 1600
Mail
to: 2505 Dekko Drive
Garrett, IN 46738
Ship to: Dock 108
6928N 400E
Kendallville, IN 46755
http://www.dekko.com
midrange.com
