Re: TAPEDEV or -t STDIO?

The engine recognizes /dev/null as a throw away and doesn't actually perform any archive at all. It just updates the records to say that one was performed, unless you specify -f in which case nothing happens at all. Art Art S. Kagel Advanced DataTools (www.advancedatatools.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, Advanced DataTools, 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 Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 11:16 AM, Brian Amstutz < brian.amstutz@asburyseminary.edu> wrote: > HP-UX 11i v2 > Informix 10.00.FC9 > > ontape -s -L 0 with TAPEDEV set to /dev/null takes 2 seconds or less > ontape -s -L 0 -t STDIO > /dev/null still running after 30 minutes> > Besides the question of "why" is it so much longer when using -t STDIO, my > real question is if this archive were to a "real" file (instead of > /dev/null), would the time difference be significantly longer as well - > i.e. would using -t STDIO > <somefile> take significantly longer than > setting TAPEDEV to <somefile>? > > Brian > _______________________________________________ > Informix-list mailing list > Informix-list@iiug.org > http://www.iiug.org/mailman/listinfo/informix-list >