Rob,
Agree, a bit confusing.
The GUI only states the below, 3 choices.
"Let BRMS decide".
Do not allow save item to be spread across devices.
Not Parallel.
Paul
-----Original Message-----
From: MIDRANGE-L [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rob Berendt
Sent: Monday, March 11, 2019 11:57 AM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
Subject: RE: BRMS to tighten up parallel-parallel saves
His Wiki is confusing.
Trying to figure out
"A serial save is done instead of a parallel save when the save does not support writing to parallel devices, for example if *ALLUSR, *IBM or *NONSYS is specified for the Library (LIB) parameter on the Save Library (SAVLIBBRM) command."
Vs
"In release V5R4M0, parallel saves of *IBM, *ALLUSR, generic libraries or a list of libraries may result in either parallel-parallel or serial-parallel format. To force serial-parallel format for *IBM, *ALLUSR, generic libraries or a list of libraries, run the following command:"
Does that mean at V5R4M0 and V5R4M0 only that data area meant something?
How does one "While it is possible to force a parallel-parallel save of *ALLUSR"?
And I have some issues with his performance considerations. Sometimes his opinions can get a bit dated. Like his belief that VTL's will always be slower. (That discussion may have occurred offline.)
Did the GUI say if it was using parallel-parallel or parallel-serial save?
-----Original Message-----
From: MIDRANGE-L <midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Steinmetz, Paul via MIDRANGE-L
Sent: Monday, March 11, 2019 11:13 AM
To: 'Midrange Systems Technical Discussion' <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Steinmetz, Paul <PSteinmetz@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: BRMS to tighten up parallel-parallel saves
Rob,
Did IBM mention/confirm that when using multiple devices with a BRMS control group save, you can only set the parallel options in iNav BRMS GUI, not available in green screen.
The default is "Let BRMS decide"
Other choices are
Do not allow save item to be spread across devices
Not Parallel.
Also, there are some BRMS data areas that may also impact this.
https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/community/wikis/home?lang=en#!/wiki/IBM%20Backup%2C%20Recovery%20and%20Media%20Services%20(BRMS)%20for%20i/page/FAQ%20%26%20Data%20areas
Force objects to be saved in true parallel - QSRPARFMT
Force a serial save of libraries in a backup control group when multiple drives are specified - Q1APRLNONE
I had some BRMS recovery issues with parallel-serial for the IBM libraries.
When using parallel-serial, the order of the libraries was different, not what IBM was expecting, which led to errors.
IBM recommended not to multiple drives at all for the IBM libraries.
Issue was only on the recovery, save was fine.
I agree, if the saves can be faster, definitely do.
Not good if the recovery then fails.
Paul
-----Original Message-----
From: MIDRANGE-L [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jim Oberholtzer
Sent: Monday, March 11, 2019 10:16 AM
To: 'Midrange Systems Technical Discussion'
Subject: RE: BRMS to tighten up parallel-parallel saves
Rob:
No good deed will go unpunished......
I want the ability to decide if the recovery process should be slower and
require multiple devices.....I'll trade the once or twice we recover the
system during testing to save the time during the save process......
As long as the recovery works, then why not?
--
Jim Oberholtzer
Agile Technology Architects
-----Original Message-----
From: MIDRANGE-L <midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Rob
Berendt
Sent: Monday, March 11, 2019 8:54 AM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: BRMS to tighten up parallel-parallel saves
This applies to shops using a media library with multiple drives.
There is currently a hack in BRMS where if, instead of doing
Backup
Seq Items
10 *SAVSYS
20 *IBM
30 *ALLUSR
40 *ALLDLO
50 *LINK
You replace the *ALLUSR with a list name and put *ALLUSR on that list, and,
instead of doing a parallel-serial save it will do a parallel-parallel save.
A parallel-serial save spreads libraries across volumes but keeps each
library on a single tape (space permitting) A parallel-parallel save will
also spread the contents of a single library across volumes.
Some prefer the parallel-serial save for fear of having to restore from a
single drive device. Less tape flopping.
I will NEVER have to restore from a single drive device. IDC if we're
talking earthquakes, fire, flood, whatever.
I have two libraries which are massive in size compared to the rest of the
libraries. It makes more sense to also spread the contents of those
libraries out to increase speed. If I was using physical tapes it would
also leave less tapes with wasted space.
I did a big mistake and asked for an enhancement. IBM replied to RFE. They
will close this hack. Freedom of choice is not to be tolerated.
http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/rfe/execute?use_case=viewRfe&CR_ID=128968
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
--
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@xxxxxxxxxxxx for any subscription related questions.
Help support midrange.com by shopping at amazon.com with our affiliate link:
https://amazon.midrange.com
midrange.com
