Re: SAVOBJ with and without Save-While-Active

[Charles Wilt <charles.wilt@xxxxxxxxx>]

Save-While-Active (SWA) is only needed for data (mostly PF) objects...

IBM i doesn't lock *PGM objects while they are being used.
Active *DSPF object locks shouldn't prevent a save

Unless your *PGMs and PFs are in the same library, I don't see why you'd
need SWA.

CHarles

On Fri, Jul 12, 2024 at 9:28 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.