SAVACTWAIT time on SAVLIB, etc.

JohnDavid

5 pts.

Tags:

Application security

AS/400

Backup and Recovery

Data analysis

Database

DataCenter

Encryption

IBM DB2

Instant Messaging

Microsoft Exchange

Oracle

Secure Coding

Security

Hi, Has anyone experimented with the SAVACTWAIT time on the SAVLIB command. The default on 120 second seems rather long. What I am looking for is a realistic value based on fact such as that if an object does not become available after 5 second the change that it will become available after 120 seconds is virtually 0%. My thinking says that this possibility of the object becomming available for save diminishes exponentially over time: Seconds to wait Possibility % -------------------------------------- 1 90 2 40 3 10 4 5 5 2 etc., etc., etc. I had a look at the Knowledge Base and Info Center but could not find anything. Any help will be appreciated.

Asked: May 29, 2006 8:19 AM Last updated: November 30, 2010 2:49 PM

Answer Wiki

Last updated: May 30, 2006 1:37 PM GMT

Abigail645 pts.
History
Contributors
- Ordered by most recent
- Abigail645 pts.

Thanks. We'll let you know when a new response is added.

I use this for 99.9% of my saves with a SAVACTWAIT of 05. We will see occasional locking but not normally.

Discuss This Question: 5 Replies

TomLiotta Dec 7, 2009 7:33 AM GMT

Is there a problem somewhere in this question? If you want to use 5 seconds, then use 5 seconds. Tom

125,585 pointsBadges:

report
ITAddict Dec 7, 2009 7:32 PM GMT

Availibility to wait time will depend entirely on your environment. If you have interactive users that are accessing data while you are saving, 120 seconds is a reasonable amount of time assuming they are getting their work done and getting out. If you have batch jobs running against data, 5 seconds would be plenty of time.

875 pointsBadges:

report
TomLiotta Nov 21, 2010 11:44 AM GMT

If you have batch jobs running against data, 5 seconds would be plenty of time. Although that's probably true for many sites, it shouldn't be. Interactive users should be the ones holding extremely short locks while batch locks may be expected to hold locks for the length of the job and they might run a long time. Tom

125,585 pointsBadges:

report
Boykie Nov 22, 2010 8:56 PM GMT

We have been running for years with 5 seconds as we anticipate some objects being locked - and have been happy with the results. We only have about 6 or 8 objects locked, so waiting 40 seconds is not horrendous. Like a previous responder said, "if you want to use 5 seconds, use 5 seconds". Am I missing something ?

65 pointsBadges:

report
OldSysAdmin Nov 30, 2010 2:49 PM GMT

I think the person is looking for other persons experience so that he doesn't just go make a change and cause problems unnecessarily. Sure, he can make it whatever he wants. He wants to make an intelligent and informed (as much as possible) change. You know. like us old timers used to do, fully understand as much as possible. As opposed to the young kids today, don't read the documentation or anaylze it, just try a million different things and eventually one of them will work.

945 pointsBadges:

report