On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 00:07:59 -0600, Elardus Engelbrecht <[email protected]> wrote:
>Ed Gould wrote: > >>This conversation is really interesting (to me). >>Wouldn't it be better have a mirrored RACF DB? (of course do the copying and >>back up as well). > >If you have setup your system properly, you would have in total FOUR RACF DBs >plus additional backups of those RACF DBs. > >1. One Primary >2. One Backup <-- maintained automagically by RACF (preferably on ANOTHER >volser!) > >3 + 4 Same set, but on another location using peer to peer remote copy or >similar technology. Everything is duplicated, even the blocks, tracks, etc. >are mirror byte by byte, bit by bit. > >Above (both of them) are duplicated (again!) with IRRUT200, 400 and DFDSS. > >Call me crazy, paranoid, etc., but I'm simply not taking any changes. No fun >if you lose 100 000+ users [1] and thousands of other profiles. > > >>Maybe IBM could chime it as well? > >Could be interesting if big blue has some extra recommendations + resources >too. > >Groete / Greetings >Elardus Engelbrecht! > >[1] - I nearly destroyed my RACF DBs while using DBSYNC utility because of >profile size limits... Note that your experience points out that mirroring, and even RACF's duplexing, are not the only backup/recovery strategies you should have in place. You also need good physical backups of the RACF databases, preferrably taken nightly. RACF's duplexing, and the mirroring approach, are both good when you have a DASD issue. But when you have an administrator issue the duplex databases and the mirrored copies will also reflect whatever the administrator did. In that case about all you can fall back on is the last backup copy you made. And that backup should be made using IRRUT200, of course, so you know that it was backed up properly and without internal consistency issues. I have even known of customers who kept the RACF duplex copy inactive (not being maintained) and refreshed it during the nightly backup process. That way when an administrative error occurs they know it affects only the primary and mirrored copies, not the duplex copy, allowing faster initial recovery (RVARY ACTIVE, RVARY SWITCH) than if they had to restore a physical backup. I've never really agreed with that approach, but I can see the merits. -- Walt ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
