This portal is to open public enhancement requests against IBM System Storage products. To view all of your ideas submitted to IBM, create and manage groups of Ideas, or create an idea explicitly set to be either visible by all (public) or visible only to you and IBM (private), use the IBM Unified Ideas Portal (https://ideas.ibm.com).
We invite you to shape the future of IBM, including product roadmaps, by submitting ideas that matter to you the most. Here's how it works:
Start by searching and reviewing ideas and requests to enhance a product or service. Take a look at ideas others have posted, and add a comment, vote, or subscribe to updates on them if they matter to you. If you can't find what you are looking for,
Post an idea.
Get feedback from the IBM team and other customers to refine your idea.
Follow the idea through the IBM Ideas process.
Welcome to the IBM Ideas Portal (https://www.ibm.com/ideas) - Use this site to find out additional information and details about the IBM Ideas process and statuses.
IBM Unified Ideas Portal (https://ideas.ibm.com) - Use this site to view all of your ideas, create new ideas for any IBM product, or search for ideas across all of IBM.
ideasibm@us.ibm.com - Use this email to suggest enhancements to the Ideas process or request help from IBM for submitting your Ideas.
Due to processing by IBM, this request was reassigned to have the following updated attributes:
Brand - Servers and Systems Software
Product family - Storage
Product - Tivoli Storage Manager (TSM) Family
For recording keeping, the previous attributes were:
Brand - Tivoli
Product family - Storage
Product - Tivoli Storage Manager (TSM) Family
Thanks for your request and sorry for the great delay in response. The issue here lies with DB2 and is not something that we can improve. There may be some incremental improvements from DB2 in this area, but it does not appear to be a broad issue with our customers so we do not expect significant changes. As an alternative, FlashCopy Manager could address this issue since it would allow the backups and restores to occur much more quickly. The roll-forwarding of the logs would take more time, but that might not be as much of an issue with the faster restore operation.
An example of the flow:
DB2 has 3 active logs.
LOG1 : is active
LOG2 : empty
LOG3 : empty
when LOG1 is full, the LOG will be backed up.
The LOG will be renamed after successful backup.
LOG1 : renamed to LOG4
LOG2 : is active
LOG3 : is empty
LOG4 : is (now) empty, but actually contains information about LOG1
----------
If this would have been changed to a similar flow as for Informix.
LOG1 : is active
LOG2 : is empty
LOG3 : is empty
when LOG1 will be full, the LOG will be backed up.
If the LOG backup is successfully backed up, the LOG will be marked as backed up.
LOG1 : backed up
LOG2 : is active
LOG3 : is empty
next switch; same procedure...
LOG1 : backed up
LOG2 : backed up
LOG3 : is active
next switch:
- rename the oldest LOG file only if the LOG has been marked as backed up.
LOG1: will be renamed to LOG4
LOG2 : backed up
LOG3 : backed up
LOG4 : is active (the old LOG1 information will be overwritten)
Talk to INFORMIX to see how they have improved this.