Re: SAVOBJ with and without Save-While-Active

[Rob Berendt <robertowenberendt@xxxxxxxxx>]

We use Implementer and have it push to our other systems.  We do not have
the source pushed out to the other systems though.  This just invites the
problem you're having to solve here.
We've been doing this for decades.  Not having source on the other systems
has never been an issue.

On Fri, Jul 12, 2024 at 11:28 AM Bill and Lisa Howie <blhowie66@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

> Hello all,
>
> We have two IBM i partitions and we have copies of the same source on both
> partitions.  We are making an attempt to sync up the source and objects in
> the libraries in question between the two partitions as part of an effort
> to begin using our source management software (PTC Implementer).  Because
> we are in effect a zero-downtime operation about the only way to do this
> during a weekday is to do a save-while-active approach.  We also do a
> weekly full save of these libraries.  Our system is hosted by a third-party
> company.  My thought was to use the save-while-active option while saving
> the libraries to save files so that I could avoid getting our hosting
> company involved.  I've read up on save-while-active and it SEEMS like I
> can be just as confident that ALL the objects got saved doing it this way
> as they would on a "normal" save of the entire library.  What are
> everyone's thoughts on this?  Any gotchas to consider?  Any info is much
> appreciated.  Thanks!
>
> Bill
> --
> This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list
> To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
> visit: https://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
> or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
> at https://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.
>
> Please contact support@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx for any subscription related
> questions.