There appear to be gotchas everywhere. That would be worse than the LUW suspensions.
Regards, Richard Schuh > -----Original Message----- > From: The IBM z/VM Operating System > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rob van der Heij > Sent: Monday, July 21, 2008 3:02 PM > To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU > Subject: Re: Size of SFS control backup > > On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 10:16 PM, Schuh, Richard > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > affects ever user that is actively using SFS. The > documentation also > > says that backing up to a different filepool instead of to dasd or > > tape will cause less interference with the users. It will > take longer, > > but the users will not be affected as much. > > The problem with that is if you have to recycle that filepool > with the control backups, the access will be gone and the > control backup fails. > And I believe that unless you poke in the SFS server, you > can't re-access that other than STOP NOBACKUP and restart? > -Rob >
