Martin,
Thanks for the reply.
Can I avoid this query by object_name by instructing the restore to stop
at
the last known logical log in the ixbar file?
onbar -p
onbar -r -l -n <last logical log in ixbar
Thanks,
Andrew
----- Original Message -----
From: "Martin Fuerderer" <MARTINFU at (no spam) de.ibm.com
To: "Andrew Ford" <aford at (no spam) networkip.net
Cc: <informix-list at (no spam) iiug.org>; <informix-list-bounces at (no spam) iiug.org
Sent: Friday, November 06, 2009 9:35 AM
Subject: Re: Imported Restore with TSM and 2 engines with same
DBSERVERNAME
Hi,
yes, ON-Bar uses the CopyID fields (high and low)
to ask the SM for backup objects, normally. This is
why this CopyID info is diligently kept in the sysutils
database and the ixbar-file (for cold restore scenarios).
But I say "normally", because there is an exception:
After ON-Bar has restored dbspaces and all
applicable and "known" (by ixbar-file/sysutils info)
log file backups, there can be situations where
ON-Bar asks the SM "whether there are more log
file backups to restore". This is to catch any log file
backups that were actually done but for some reason
are not listed in sysutils or ixbar-file. In this case
ON-Bar (obviously) does not know the CopyID of
such possibly existing objects. And the query to the
SM is done by "object name" ...
You can utilize ON-Bar tracing (set BAR_DEBUG
sufficiently high, e.g. to 6, and BAR_DEBUG_LOG,
both parameters in the onconfig file) to see, which
fields ON-Bar uses to query the SM and whether
there can be any ambiguity in your specific
scenario ...
Regards, Martin
--
Martin Fuerderer
IBM Informix Development Munich, Germany
Information Management
IBM Deutschland Research & Development GmbH
Chairman of the Supervisory Board: Martin Jetter
Board of Management: Erich Baier
Corporate Seat: Boeblingen, Germany
Reg.-Gericht: Amtsgericht Stuttgart, HRB 243294
informix-list-bounces at (no spam) iiug.org wrote on 11/06/2009 04:14:06 PM:
When performing a cold restore will onbar ask TSM for the unique
storage
manager object by supplying the copyid_hi and copyid_lo fields from
columns
7 and 8 in the ixbar file?
If so, that makes a lot of sense and would explain how onbar/TSM
knows which
/engine1/engine1/rootdbs/0 file is needed for the restore (because we
have
two, the one I want to restore from production and the one from a
backup
of
the test system).
Am I right on this? Also, can there still be problems backing up
objects
from two engines with the same name to TSM?
Thanks,
Andrew
----- Original Message -----
From: "Andrew Ford" <aford at (no spam) networkip.net
To: <informix-list at (no spam) iiug.org
Sent: Friday, November 06, 2009 7:15 AM
Subject: Imported Restore with TSM and 2 engines with same
DBSERVERNAME
IDS 10.00.UC5
I have a production Informix engine with a DBSERVERNAME of engine1
running
on server1 backing up to TSM and I have a test Informix engine with
a
DBSERVERNAME of engine1 running on server2 backing up to TSM. Both
instances have SERVERNUM set to 1.
Does anyone know if there will be any issues with performing an
imported
restore of the production engine1 to the test engine running on
server2?
I'm wondering how onbar knows to ask TSM for the right restore
files
if
the
rootdbs level 0 backup files for test and production both look like
/engine1/engine1/rootdbs/0
Can there be other issues with this configuration? Could running
onsmsync
on the test engine incorrectly expire logical log backups for the
production
engine in TSM? Would giving the test engine a different SERVERNUM
fix
this?
Thanks in advance,
Andrew
_______________________________________________
Informix-list mailing list
Informix-list at (no spam) iiug.org
http://www.iiug.org/mailman/listinfo/informix-list
_______________________________________________
Informix-list mailing list
Informix-list at (no spam) iiug.org
http://www.iiug.org/mailman/listinfo/informix-list
_______________________________________________
Informix-list mailing list
Informix-list at (no spam) iiug.org
http://www.iiug.org/mailman/listinfo/informix-list 
