RE: IDS 9.40 migration-question
Neil, re Offsets.
AIX has to have an offset if you ever want to use LVM and HACMP. I've
actually tested it and using offset 0 corrupts the volume headers.
Regards
Malcilm
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-informix-list@iiug.org [mailto:owner-informix-list@iiug.org]
On Behalf Of Neil Truby
Sent: 04 May 2005 22:04
To: informix-list@iiug.org
Subject: Re: IDS 9.40 migration-question
<snagnews@freenet.de> wrote in message
news:1115239804.084952.51600@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> Hi,
>
> we would migrate from our old Informix-Online 5.1 to IDS 9.40 and have
> probed this on our testserver (Alpha-DS15, 1 CPU, 2 GB RAM, 70 GB HDD
> in RAID 10).
>
> The data was moved from the production-server to the test-server with
> dbexport (option -ss is unknown in 5.1) and dbimport databasename -d
> dbspace.
>
> We have a few questions about our migration :
>
> 1.) we have two databases in the informixserver, should every database
> use an separate dbspace?
Not necessarily, but if you want to use it then the resotre-by-dbspace
functionality might help you. It may also help you to administer your
databases more easily if you do. So, on balance, it's not a bad idea.
> 2.) we have defined one tempdbs with appr. 1,4 GB for our databases
> with 22 GB Data in it, is this ok for an OLTP-System?
"I have a piece of string. How long is it? It's blue by the way".
> 3.) should we create all indicies in a separate dbspace?
With a single disk? Waste of time.
> 4.) are big-chunks better than 2GB-chunks (because we have already
> created 2GB-Volumes over the Tru64 5.1B - LSM volumemanager)
I think not. Without wanting to put words in his mouth, Jonathan
Leffler
puts forward quite a good argument in favour of large chunks involving
head
movement or something, so maybe he'll articualte this, or you could
search
for it in Google groups.
> 5.) if we put the 300 GB rootdbs in the first chunk, and all chunks
> reside on the same raid-box, is there a reason not to put physdbs and
> logsdbs on the same chunk with defining the offset?
No, but then there's no point in having phys and logdbs separate anyway.
> 6.) Should the rootdbs on a volume over a volumemanager begin on
> offset 100?
No. Having said that, I don;t know the vagaries of Tru-64, but surely
even
it can't be crap enough to allow you to over-write the VTOC ... ?
sending to informix-list