savobj and logical files

[jj_dahlheimer]

We have a daily save that is filling up our tape, we have two logical files that have a size under dspfd of 202593402880 (200 gig). We are trying to get a retention policy made so maybe we can clear some data but in the mean time I wanted to omit these two logicals as I figured we would just recreate them anyway in a disaster situation. Issue is the tape still filled up.

When doing a dspfd on logicals vs physicals the physicals have a data space size and logicals have index size, so question is are they treated equally in a savobj?

[Brian Rusch]

If the value of the ACCPTH parameter of the save command is *YES, or *SYSVAL (the default) and the system value of QSAVACCPTH is 1, then the access paths are still saved. If that's the case, try changing the save command to ACCPTH(*NO).

[jj_dahlheimer]

Guess I should have also mentioned that the last save date on the objects was yesterday which makes me wonder why our tape filled up. 400 gig of data should have gotten us in the clear.

Our qsavaccpth is set to 1(save) so it would seem weird that it still saved them but did not update the last saved date. That is why my only thought is that logicals don't use the same amount of tape space and that omitting them did no good.

[Brian Rusch]

Right, omitting the logicals didn't save any tape space because saving a logical only saves the file definition and not the access path associated with it. The access path part of a logical is either saved when the physical file is saved or not saved at all.

[jj_dahlheimer]

I think I understand now, so really I should get rid of the omit as that just discards the definition which is nothing.

If I change the accpth(*NO) then it won't save any access paths for any logicals which really just makes restoring take longer as they have to be rebuilt.

Or I create a separate savobj command for this one large file, omit it from my original savobj and use accpth(*NO) only on the new savobj command.