Re: Here is SAVRSTLIB? (Timing of SAVLIB/RSTLIB vs CPYLIB)

[Jim Oberholtzer <midrangel@xxxxxxxxxx>]

 Remember that you have to have the correct communications set up 
between the machines for this to work.  It does not use FTP under the 
covers, rather it uses APPN.

Jim Oberholtzer
CEO/Chief Technical Architect
Agile Technology Architects, LLC


On 9/11/2010 2:57 PM, PaultinNZ wrote:
> Hi Evan,
>
> "Because the save commences shortly after the save starts it fiinishes
> much sooner than the equivalent process of saving and then restoring;..."
>
> I'm sure you meant "Because the restore commences..."
>
>
> On 10 September 2010 15:07, Evan Harris<auctionitis@xxxxxxxxx>  wrote:
>
> > >  Hi Vern
> > >
> > >  It doesn't just send a savf - you can tell that because the restore
> > >  starts before the send process completes. It's also more efficient
> > >  space and time-wise when used to save and restore a library on the
> > >  same system.
> > >
> > >  Because the save commences shortly after the save starts it fiinishes
> > >  much sooner than the equivalent process of saving and then restoring;
> > >  it also uses less storage as the only disk required is the storage
> > >  buffer the save is written to and restored from.
> > >
> > >  I've used this on a couple of systems where I periodically needed to
> > >  take a snapshot of a library.
> > >
> > >  On Sat, Sep 11, 2010 at 12:02 PM, Vernon Hamberg<vhamberg@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >  wrote:
> > > >  >  SAVRSTLIB is part of an option of SS1 called Object Connect-I forget the
> > >  option number-it's free-find out who can install it. But I don't see any
> > >  advantage to that over SAVLIB/RSTLIB-that sends the SAVF to the
> > >  destination-I just think there's extra overhead, but I don't know that for
> > >  certain.
> > > >  >
> > > >  >  Vern Hamberg
> > > >  >
> > > >  >  Sent from my Samsung Epic™ 4G