storage pool feedback
Right now in every ifx server I have, space increase is managed manually. Any of you tried the storage pool options? I have done it in test servers and I'm afraid I will loose control over what is the server doing. For instance I'm thinking about creating a storage pool but not activating the autoexpandable on dbspaces and chunks. If someone has been doing this it would help me a lot if you tell me the good and the bad things you found. As always, thanks in advance.
I have a client who is using storage pool this way. We monitor his dbspaces for him and manually add space from the pool when needed. The auto option does work and I have other clients using that. It shifts the monitoring burden from monitoring your dbspaces to monitoring your storage pool for running out of space. That is the main difference. Art Art S. Kagel, President and Principal Consultant ASK Database Management www.askdbmgt.com Blog: http://informix-myview.blogspot.com/ Disclaimer: Please keep in mind that my own opinions are my own opinions and do not reflect on the IIUG, nor any other organization with which I am associated either explicitly, implicitly, or by inference. 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, May 24, 2016 at 11:09 AM, JACOBO BALBUENA <jacobo.bc@gmail.com> wrote: > Right now in every ifx server I have, space increase is managed manually. > > Any of you tried the storage pool options? I have done it in test servers > and > I'm afraid I will loose control over what is the server doing. > > For instance I'm thinking about creating a storage pool but not activating > the > autoexpandable on dbspaces and chunks. > > If someone has been doing this it would help me a lot if you tell me the > good > and the bad things you found. > > As always, thanks in advance. > > > > ******************************************************************************* > Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum. > > --089e0149c0c46b4da505339c43be