relative pathnames for chunks

Anyone know if it is OK to use a relative path to chunks. I have links to my raw devices in $INFORMIXDIR/links. I would like to use a path relative to $INFORMIXDIR for all my chunks. onspaces adds chunks that way OK and I was able to store data on those chunks. But, from the manual: Specifying Names for Storage Spaces and Chunks Chunk names follow the same rules as storage-space names. Specify an explicit pathname for a storage space or chunk as follows: Would a relative path be explicit? Anybody ever done this? I figured I'd check here before blowing away the database and starting over with all relative paths. Regards, Bill sending to informix-list

Bill, Internally we use relative path names to test such things as HDR. However, using relative path names is rather tricky because that means that you must be in the top directory before issueing any database commands that access the chunks. Because of the restriction, I would strongly urge you not to consider doing this. I wouldn't be suprised to hear tech support say "Not Supported" if you ran into problems using relative path names. M.P. "Bill Dare" <dareb@jevic.com> wrote in message news:bhe47h$mo5$1@terabinaries.xmission.com... > > Anyone know if it is OK to use a relative path to chunks. I have links to > my raw devices in $INFORMIXDIR/links. I would like to use a path relative > to $INFORMIXDIR for all my chunks. onspaces adds chunks that way OK and I > was able to store data on those chunks. But, from the manual: > > Specifying Names for Storage Spaces and Chunks > Chunk names follow the same rules as storage-space names. Specify an > explicit pathname for a storage space or chunk as follows: > > Would a relative path be explicit? Anybody ever done this? > > I figured I'd check here before blowing away the database and starting over > with all relative paths. > > Regards, > Bill > > sending to informix-list