Re: [7.3] IFS save 21 vs. sav with chgperiod (no BRMS!) -- MIDRANGE-L

Subject: Re: [7.3] IFS save 21 vs. sav with chgperiod (no BRMS!)
From: Patrik Schindler <poc@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2025 14:21:23 +0100
List-archive: <https://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l/>
List-post: <mailto:midrange-l@lists.midrange.com>
List-subscribe: <https://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l>, <mailto:midrange-l-request@lists.midrange.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <https://lists.midrange.com/mailman/options/midrange-l>, <mailto:midrange-l-request@lists.midrange.com?subject=unsubscribe>

Hello Jim,

Am 13.02.2025 um 14:11 schrieb Jim Oberholtzer <midrangel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:

Maybe true, but the alternative is saving the entire IFS every time, like most of us do.

Again, it works as I wish in V4R5. Maybe I explained something not clearly enough?

Recovery design should always precede back up design and that is one of the points that need to be decided.

I fully agree. Hence my explanation about my backup concept in my initial post.

:wq! PoC

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

Follow-Ups:

Re: [7.3] IFS save 21 vs. sav with chgperiod (no BRMS!) , Rob Berendt

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2025 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 [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.