RE: The legacy of bad chunk names
Posted in 2000
Topics: Storage & Space Management, SQL Development & Query Writing, Server Administration, Migration, Import/Export & Data Conversion, Cloud, Docker & Containers, Versions, Editions & End-of-Life
Anyway to use HPL for this issue, maybe piped to compress??
Much faster than dbexport . . . .
John Carlson
Informix DBA
EDS - WHSmith USA
3200 Windy Hill Road, Suite 1500 West
Atlanta, GA 30330
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Art S. Kagel [mailto:kagel@bloomberg.net]
> Sent: Friday, September 29, 2000 2:05 PM
> To: informix-list@iiug.org
> Subject: Re: The legacy of bad chunk names
>
>
> If your OS can handle files >2GB then myexport can handle it. Let me
> know, Neil, if you want to give it a try, I have a new version in
> testing I can give you that will unload the tables in
> parallel! instead
> of serially, great for larger databases. I have not uploaded it yet
> because I have not worked the kinks out of the parallel myimport but
> the myexport part works like a charm.
>
> Art S. Kagel
>
> Neil Truby wrote:
> >
> > Lateral thinking please!
> >
> > When I joined my client's site they were already on IDS
> v7.24, but all the
> > chunk names are
> /opt/informixV7.13/dbspaces1/lawson_default_1 etc. It was
> > set up this way because of a lack of foresight by the DBA.
> >
> > Now we're on v9.20, but still with the /opt/informixV7.13
> ... chunknames!
> > It's really quite confusing but, more importantly, it's
> high;y unpleasing
> > aesthetically. I can't see that we can ever get away from
> it. IDS 9.20 has
> > re-introduced the old v7.24 bug in onunload where it tries
> to put indexes
> > into into their original dbspaces (well done those people
> in QA!). But even
> > if they hadn't, a "feature" of IDS9.2x, hightlighted by Art
> Kagel et al, is
> > that you cannoy use onunload to unload a database converted
> from v7.2x.
> >
> > The database in question is over 200GBytes in size. So dbexport is
> > untenable. Are we destined to be stuck with informixV7.13
> names forever?
>
Yes, but with the 500+ table sin a Lawson schema, HPL is a high-maintenance
solution.
John Carlson <John_Carlson@whsmithusa.com> wrote in message
news:8r32k4$sds$1@news.xmission.com...
>
> Anyway to use HPL for this issue, maybe piped to compress??
>
> Much faster than dbexport . . . .
>
> John Carlson
> Informix DBA
> EDS - WHSmith USA
> 3200 Windy Hill Road, Suite 1500 West
> Atlanta, GA 30330
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Art S. Kagel [mailto:kagel@bloomberg.net]
> > Sent: Friday, September 29, 2000 2:05 PM
> > To: informix-list@iiug.org
> > Subject: Re: The legacy of bad chunk names
> >
> >
> > If your OS can handle files >2GB then myexport can handle it. Let me
> > know, Neil, if you want to give it a try, I have a new version in
> > testing I can give you that will unload the tables in
> > parallel! instead
> > of serially, great for larger databases. I have not uploaded it yet
> > because I have not worked the kinks out of the parallel myimport but
> > the myexport part works like a charm.
> >
> > Art S. Kagel
> >
> > Neil Truby wrote:
> > >
> > > Lateral thinking please!
> > >
> > > When I joined my client's site they were already on IDS
> > v7.24, but all the
> > > chunk names are
> > /opt/informixV7.13/dbspaces1/lawson_default_1 etc. It was
> > > set up this way because of a lack of foresight by the DBA.
> > >
> > > Now we're on v9.20, but still with the /opt/informixV7.13
> > ... chunknames!
> > > It's really quite confusing but, more importantly, it's
> > high;y unpleasing
> > > aesthetically. I can't see that we can ever get away from
> > it. IDS 9.20 has
> > > re-introduced the old v7.24 bug in onunload where it tries
> > to put indexes
> > > into into their original dbspaces (well done those people
> > in QA!). But even
> > > if they hadn't, a "feature" of IDS9.2x, hightlighted by Art
> > Kagel et al, is
> > > that you cannoy use onunload to unload a database converted
> > from v7.2x.
> > >
> > > The database in question is over 200GBytes in size. So dbexport is
> > > untenable. Are we destined to be stuck with informixV7.13
> > names forever?
> >