WARNING: Next backup of DBspace rootdbs must be le

Hi, we have ID 10.00.FC9 on AIX 5.3. Our the online.log is showing randomly these WARNING messages, since May 27 about 7 days ago. There are days where the WARNING dont spam, but there are other days where spam. There is not been a physical change in the instance in the days where spams these messages, and the only physicals made are to add chunks to dbspaces, we have not added chunks to rootdbs or dbspaces where are the physical o logical logs. We dont have any replication service. Also the time where are showed these messages is not being backed up the instance. Anyone knows why are these messages happening??? Thanks a lot in advanced. Tue May 26 00:03:02 2009 Wed May 27 00:00:02 2009 18:42:02 WARNING: Next backup of DBspace rootdbs must be level-0 backup. 18:42:02 WARNING: Next backup of DBspace logsdbs_gen must be level-0 backup. 18:42:02 WARNING: Next backup of DBspace alma must be level-0 backup. 18:42:02 WARNING: Next backup of DBspace alma_acu must be level-0 backup. 18:42:02 WARNING: Next backup of DBspace alma_acu_rel must be level-0 backup. 18:42:02 WARNING: Next backup of DBspace physdbs_gen must be level-0 backup. 18:42:02 WARNING: Next backup of DBspace acumu_deco_dat must be level-0 backup. 18:42:51 WARNING: Next backup of DBspace hiper0027 must be level-0 backup. 23:55:59 WARNING: Next backup of DBspace decote_gen_idx must be level-0 backup. 23:55:59 WARNING: Next backup of DBspace estaciones must be level-0 backup. Thu May 28 00:00:00 2009 00:01:00 WARNING: Next backup of DBspace gen_d must be level-0 backup. 00:06:02 WARNING: Next backup of DBspace gen_i must be level-0 backup. 00:11:22 WARNING: Next backup of DBspace hiper0009 must be level-0 backup. 00:11:22 WARNING: Next backup of DBspace hiper0002 must be level-0 backup. 00:11:22 WARNING: Next backup of DBspace hiper0006 must be level-0 backup. 00:11:22 WARNING: Next backup of DBspace hiper0010 must be level-0 backup. Fri May 29 00:00:41 2009 Sat May 30 00:01:32 2009 Sun May 31 00:02:31 2009 13:33:24 WARNING: Next backup of DBspace rootdbs must be level-0 backup. 13:33:24 WARNING: Next backup of DBspace logsdbs_gen must be level-0 backup. 13:33:24 WARNING: Next backup of DBspace alma must be level-0 backup. 13:33:24 WARNING: Next backup of DBspace alma_acu must be level-0 backup. 13:33:24 WARNING: Next backup of DBspace alma_acu_rel must be level-0 backup. 13:33:24 WARNING: Next backup of DBspace physdbs_gen must be level-0 backup. 13:33:24 WARNING: Next backup of DBspace acumu_deco_dat must be level-0 backup. 13:33:24 WARNING: Next backup of DBspace acumu_deco_idx must be level-0 backu

There have been changes to these dbspaces which you may not be aware of, for example, chunks added, new dbspaces created, etc. A good level 0 should clear out these warning messages. ________________________________ From: LYNKZ MIKE <yellr@telecom.com.co> To: ids@iiug.org Sent: Tuesday, June 2, 2009 10:50:03 AM Subject: WARNING: Next backup of DBspace rootdbs must be le [15884] Hi, we have ID 10.00.FC9 on AIX 5.3. Our the online.log is showing randomly these WARNING messages, since May 27 about 7 days ago. There are days where the WARNING dont spam, but there are other days where spam. There is not been a physical change in the instance in the days where spams these messages, and the only physicals made are to add chunks to dbspaces, we have not added chunks to rootdbs or dbspaces where are the physical o logical logs. We dont have any replication service. Also the time where are showed these messages is not being backed up the instance. Anyone knows why are these messages happening??? Thanks a lot in advanced. Tue May 26 00:03:02 2009 Wed May 27 00:00:02 2009 18:42:02 WARNING: Next backup of DBspace rootdbs must be level-0 backup. 18:42:02 WARNING: Next backup of DBspace logsdbs_gen must be level-0 backup. 18:42:02 WARNING: Next backup of DBspace alma must be level-0 backup. 18:42:02 WARNING: Next backup of DBspace alma_acu must be level-0 backup. 18:42:02 WARNING: Next backup of DBspace alma_acu_rel must be level-0 backup. 18:42:02 WARNING: Next backup of DBspace physdbs_gen must be level-0 backup. 18:42:02 WARNING: Next backup of DBspace acumu_deco_dat must be level-0 backup. 18:42:51 WARNING: Next backup of DBspace hiper0027 must be level-0 backup. 23:55:59 WARNING: Next backup of DBspace decote_gen_idx must be level-0 backup. 23:55:59 WARNING: Next backup of DBspace estaciones must be level-0 backup. Thu May 28 00:00:00 2009 00:01:00 WARNING: Next backup of DBspace gen_d must be level-0 backup. 00:06:02 WARNING: Next backup of DBspace gen_i must be level-0 backup. 00:11:22 WARNING: Next backup of DBspace hiper0009 must be level-0 backup. 00:11:22 WARNING: Next backup of DBspace hiper0002 must be level-0 backup. 00:11:22 WARNING: Next backup of DBspace hiper0006 must be level-0 backup. 00:11:22 WARNING: Next backup of DBspace hiper0010 must be level-0 backup. Fri May 29 00:00:41 2009 Sat May 30 00:01:32 2009 Sun May 31 00:02:31 2009 13:33:24 WARNING: Next backup of DBspace rootdbs must be level-0 backup. 13:33:24 WARNING: Next backup of DBspace logsdbs_gen must be level-0 backup. 13:33:24 WARNING: Next backup of DBspace alma must be level-0 backup. 13:33:24 WARNING: Next backup of DBspace alma_acu must be level-0 backup. 13:33:24 WARNING: Next backup of DBspace alma_acu_rel must be level-0 backup. 13:33:24 WARNING: Next backup of DBspace physdbs_gen must be level-0 backup. 13:33:24 WARNING: Next backup of DBspace acumu_deco_dat must be level-0 backup. 13:33:24 WARNING: Next backup of DBspace acumu_deco_idx must be level-0 backu ******************************************************************************* Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.

>Hi, we have ID 10.00.FC9 on AIX 5.3. Our the online.log is showing randomly these WARNING messages, >since May 27 about 7 days ago. There are days where the WARNING dont spam, but there are other days >where spam. There is not been a physical change in the instance in the days where spams these messages, >and the only physicals made are to add chunks to dbspaces, we have not added chunks to rootdbs or >dbspaces where are the physical o logical logs. We dont have any replication service. Also the time where are >showed these messages is not being backed up the instance. Anyone knows why are these messages >happening??? You are getting these warning because timestamps on your system are increasing rapidly. There was code put in place to detect this and then prevent the server from taking level 1 and level 2 archives because if the timestamp increases too fast, incremental archives (level 1 or 2's) end up missing pages. So this message was put in to alert you that you will be unable to take incremental archives on those dbspaces, and the server will enforce the fact that the next archive on that dbspace must be a level 0. Also the check appears to occur at every checkpoint, but it looks like once a dbspace gets flagged for no incremental archives you shouldn't be getting a warning for that dbspace again, so you should only see at most 1 warning per dbspace. Jacques Renaut IBM IDS Advanced Support APD Team

Hi, thanks for answering, yeah we add chunks to dbspaces, but we had not added chunks to rootdbs y physical y logical logs dbspaces. For example today and May 26 i added chunks to normal dbspaces and we didnt get the WARNINIG NEXT backup message. What other reason it could cause this??? Thanks a lot.

So let me know if i understood you, you said its a normal messages which prevents me to make a level 1 or 2 backup on the instance?? and this is happening for something related to timestamp on S.O??? I didint understand you well the timestamp thing?? how this happens?? Finally is this a bug?? Thanks in advanced.

Please include at least part of the post to which you are replying. Most denizens of these forums do not use the WEB interface, we use email and it's hard to keep track of who's replying to which posted reply. What Mike was talking about as to timestamps, is that IDS puts a sequential stamp on each page as it is modified. One purpose of that is for the archives. The archive levels 1 and 2 archive only pages that have a timestamp greater than the timestamp that was current when the last higher level archive was taken. Even the level zero archive uses the timestamp to determine whether it needs to restore preimages of pages with current timestamps later than the start of the archive. On a very busy system the timestamp can wrap around as it is only a 32bit value. Art Art S. Kagel Oninit (www.oninit.com) IIUG Board of Directors (art@iiug.org) Disclaimer: Please keep in mind that my own opinions are my own opinions and do not reflect on my employer, Oninit, the IIUG, nor any other organization with which I am associated either explicitly or implicitly. Neither do those opinions reflect those of other individuals affiliated with any entity with which I am affiliated nor those of the entities themselves. On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 6:30 PM, LYNKZ MIKE <yellr@telecom.com.co> wrote: > So let me know if i understood you, you said its a normal messages which > prevents me to make a level 1 or 2 backup on the instance?? and this is > happening for something related to timestamp on S.O??? I didint understand > you > well the timestamp thing?? how this happens?? Finally is this a bug?? > Thanks > in advanced. > > > > ******************************************************************************* > Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum. > > --001636c5a57b2f9b82046b653017

What Mike was talking about as to timestamps, is that IDS puts a sequential stamp on each page as it is modified. One purpose of that is for the archives. The archive levels 1 and 2 archive only pages that have a timestamp greater than the timestamp that was current when the last higher level archive was taken. Even the level zero archive uses the timestamp to determine whether it needs to restore preimages of pages with current timestamps later than the start of the archive. On a very busy system the timestamp can wrap around as it is only a 32bit value. Uhmm, so its normal?? or is there a way to avoid these messages??

^Uhmm, so its normal?? or is there a way to avoid these messages?? Yes it's expected behavior. The way to avoid these messages would be to take level 0 archive more frequently (so the timestamp half-wrap would be less likely to occur since you only need to go through half the available timestamps before it causes problems for incremental archives). Jacques Renaut IBM IDS Advanced Support ADP Team

^Uhmm, so its normal?? or is there a way to avoid these messages?? Yes it's expected behavior. The way to avoid these messages would be to take level 0 archive more frequently (so the timestamp half-wrap would be less likely to occur since you only need to go through half the available timestamps before it causes problems for incremental archives). Jacques Renaut IBM IDS Advanced Support ADP Team Oh thank you so much, you cleared my doubts.

It's "normal" in the sense that it's going to happen if your server is that busy. The way to get rid of the messages is to take a level zero archive more often as that resets the timestamp. Art Art S. Kagel Oninit (www.oninit.com) IIUG Board of Directors (art@iiug.org) Disclaimer: Please keep in mind that my own opinions are my own opinions and do not reflect on my employer, Oninit, the IIUG, nor any other organization with which I am associated either explicitly or implicitly. Neither do those opinions reflect those of other individuals affiliated with any entity with which I am affiliated nor those of the entities themselves. On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 3:13 PM, LYNKZ MIKE <yellr@telecom.com.co> wrote: > What Mike was talking about as to timestamps, is that IDS puts a sequential > stamp on each page as it is modified. One purpose of that is for the > archives. The archive levels 1 and 2 archive only pages that have a > timestamp greater than the timestamp that was current when the last higher > level archive was taken. Even the level zero archive uses the timestamp to > determine whether it needs to restore preimages of pages with current > timestamps later than the start of the archive. On a very busy system the > timestamp can wrap around as it is only a 32bit value. > > Uhmm, so its normal?? or is there a way to avoid these messages?? > > > > ******************************************************************************* > Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum. > > --001636c5a57b34fc44046b786043