Re: Need to restore Level 0 backup

R.A. Reissaus wrote: > -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- > Van: Marco Greco [mailto:marco@4glworks.com] > Verzonden: vrijdag 12 augustus 2005 18:03 > Aan: r.a.reissaus@risdi.com > CC: informix-list@iiug.org > Onderwerp: Re: Need to restore Level 0 backup > > > r.a.reissaus@risdi.com wrote: > >>hello. >>It is advisale to have at least the same IDS version as the one you >>had. The OS type/version doens't *always* matter as long as it is >>close to what you had. IDS version does matter, since there are always >>small differences thatcan play havoc with what you are trying to do. >>You can build a Linux server, but you would need a Linux build IDS for >>that.For you sake I hope the level 0 you have was made using ontape. >>You need to do a lot more work when restoring an onbar archive. > > > Beg to differ - IBM Informix does not support restores across operating > systems. > >>>Mmm I do not say anywhere that he CAN do this am i? :-)) > > > The fact that you *might* be able to get away with it in some > circumstances does not mean in any way that it will work. > >>>I think that is where my 'doesn't *always* matter' comes in. > > > In particular, Intel x86 is a little endian platform, while PA-Risc 1 is big > > endian, so a restore across the two will just not work, period. > > >>>I'll tell that to our old dual PIII server running SuSE 9.0 on which I > > have a 7.3UC(5) IDS running a 200GB db that was ontaped from HP11.0 IDS > 7.3FC 3 years ago. Works fine. > >>>But then again, that may be the *might get away with it* part. So I'll > > tell it it shouldn't do that with a aix 5.2 (64bit) ontape 9.4 20GB archive > that runs under SuSE 9.2 (32bit) with ids 9.4. > > >>>But maybe I was just lucky, or good, or whatever. Never know how a cow > > would catch a rabbit untill you see it do it. > Trust me, none of your examples are valid 7.3x.Ux on Linux vs 7.3x.Fx on HPUX 11: - all of the members of the page header + slot tables are byte swapped - the dbspace slot structure is different (longer by 4 bytes on Fx due to the word size difference) - the log slot structure is different (longer by 4 bytes on Fx due to the word size difference) - the checkpoint record header is different. (and these are just a few things that spring to mind - I'm sure there will be more) 9.40.Ux on Linux vs 9.40.Fx on AIX: - byte swapped as above - page size is different (2k vs 4k) if you had said 7.3 on sco to 7.3 on linux, or 9.2x.Fx on Tru64 to 9.2x.Ux on linux, or 9.40.UCx on solaris to 9.40.FCx on HPUX, that would have made it feasible. it is true though that you can switch instances from 9.40.Ux and 9.40.Fx and back on the same platform, and in fact the release notes point you to how to rebuild sysmaster if you wish to switch binaries on your existing instances. I think you'll find that you have used dbexport/dbimport, or HPL, rather than ontape/onbar, in the migrations above. -- Ciao, Marco ______________________________________________________________________________ Marco Greco /UK /IBM Standard disclaimers apply! Informix faq http://www.iiug.org/techinfo/faq/informix.htm 4glworks http://www.4glworks.com Informix on Linux http://www.4glworks.com/ifmxlinux.htm sending to informix-list