Re: Run 'onunload' on an HDR secondary?

bozon wrote: > Interesting, we were wondering if you could run ontape on the secondary > to back up the database but I have been so busy I haven't been able to > investigate or test it. (I just realized it would probably only take a > minute to check the c.d.i archives, but then I couldn't implement it > for 6 months anyway.) <SNIP> Yes you can run ontape on the secondary to get a consistent archive of the servers. The operation would not block or otherwise affect concurrent updates from the primary except as any resource usage on the machine and server would. The archive would be restorable onto either host. Art S. Kagel

i doubt that it'll work; since it's readony and finishing a level 0 archive requires the system reserved pages to be updated!!! i guess i should do a quick test..... for onunload and dbexport .... if it works then i guess this can be seen as a bug since onunload places a lock on the thing to be unloaded in order to get consistant info.... dbexport same story... and since this is a readonly where the logs are applyd to, one can not get a consistant situation.... Superboer. Art S. Kagel schreef: > bozon wrote: > > Interesting, we were wondering if you could run ontape on the secondary > > to back up the database but I have been so busy I haven't been able to > > investigate or test it. (I just realized it would probably only take a > > minute to check the c.d.i archives, but then I couldn't implement it > > for 6 months anyway.) > <SNIP> > Yes you can run ontape on the secondary to get a consistent archive of the > servers. The operation would not block or otherwise affect concurrent > updates from the primary except as any resource usage on the machine and > server would. The archive would be restorable onto either host. > > Art S. Kagel

What about backing up without marking the database as backed up? Isn't that a new feature of informix 10? ontape -F in think. Would this allow a backup to be done on the secondary, because it isn't updating the system tables? Superboer wrote: > i doubt that it'll work; since it's readony and finishing a level 0 > archive requires the system reserved pages to be updated!!! > > i guess i should do a quick test..... > > for onunload and dbexport .... if it works then i guess this can be > seen as a bug > since onunload places a lock on the thing to be unloaded in order to > get > consistant info.... dbexport same story... > and since this is a readonly where the logs are applyd to, one can not > get a > consistant situation.... > > Superboer. > > Art S. Kagel schreef: > > > bozon wrote: > > > Interesting, we were wondering if you could run ontape on the secondary > > > to back up the database but I have been so busy I haven't been able to > > > investigate or test it. (I just realized it would probably only take a > > > minute to check the c.d.i archives, but then I couldn't implement it > > > for 6 months anyway.) > > <SNIP> > > Yes you can run ontape on the secondary to get a consistent archive of the > > servers. The operation would not block or otherwise affect concurrent > > updates from the primary except as any resource usage on the machine and > > server would. The archive would be restorable onto either host. > > > > Art S. Kagel

thin ice since i haven't played with 10. ontape -F sounds like onbar -F which does a fake backup of the dbthis is to enable logging modes etc to become active. this will not create a backup at all.. Superboer. bozon schreef: > What about backing up without marking the database as backed up? Isn't > that a new feature of informix 10? ontape -F in think. > > Would this allow a backup to be done on the secondary, because it isn't > updating the system tables? > > Superboer wrote: > > i doubt that it'll work; since it's readony and finishing a level 0 > > archive requires the system reserved pages to be updated!!! > > > > i guess i should do a quick test..... > > > > for onunload and dbexport .... if it works then i guess this can be > > seen as a bug > > since onunload places a lock on the thing to be unloaded in order to > > get > > consistant info.... dbexport same story... > > and since this is a readonly where the logs are applyd to, one can not > > get a > > consistant situation.... > > > > Superboer. > > > > Art S. Kagel schreef: > > > > > bozon wrote: > > > > Interesting, we were wondering if you could run ontape on the secondary > > > > to back up the database but I have been so busy I haven't been able to > > > > investigate or test it. (I just realized it would probably only take a > > > > minute to check the c.d.i archives, but then I couldn't implement it > > > > for 6 months anyway.) > > > <SNIP> > > > Yes you can run ontape on the secondary to get a consistent archive of the > > > servers. The operation would not block or otherwise affect concurrent > > > updates from the primary except as any resource usage on the machine and > > > server would. The archive would be restorable onto either host. > > > > > > Art S. Kagel