Options
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Printer Friendly Page
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
I have a SnapCreator clone of an Informix production DB containing 5 volumes that gets refreshed every day at 4:30am and mounted up to a new server called Pegasus. This has been working fine. This pasted weekend I wanted to use SnapCreator to clone the same Production Informix DB to another server Asteroid. So I setup my new policy and pointed it to the new server Asteroid. When I ran the SnapCreator process to my surpise it removed the clone that I had to the original server Pegasus. Has anyone else ran into an issue cloning 1 DB to multiple servers using SnapCreator. Is there a setting that I am missing?
Solved! See The Solution
1 ACCEPTED SOLUTION
migration has accepted the solution
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Yep SC 3.5 supports this. We changed the naming convention for clones to allow it to be more flexible. Just a warning done have a "-" in your config name, as that isnt allowed in a clone name and we now use config name as part of clone name.
Regards,
Keith
10 REPLIES 10
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Snap Creator clone policy NUM_CLONES is per volume so if NUM_CLONES=5 then SC will allow 5 clones for volumes listed in config. If you create two configs that number is still 5 and each time either config runs a clone will be deleted if you have more than 5 clones.
We dont support cloning to multiple systems at this time since we cant control when clones will be deleted if multiple configs are involved.
Hope this helps
Keith
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Seems like being able to name the clone a specific name would resolve the issue of them getting removed. I was able to use SnapCreator to do the second clone by changing the NUM_CLONES parameter I then split the clone and renamed the clone once it was complete so that SnapCreator would not remove it. Do you know what would happen if I don't split the clone and just rename it? Would SnapCreator still be able to delete since it is not split?
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Yep if you just rename without the "cl_" it will no longer be managed by SC so SC wont delete it.
If you do clone split and dont rename volume I believe SC might delete it but not 100% sure. If it is easy I would test it to be sure.
Generally renaming volume before doing split would be my recommendation, since at that point it should no longer be managed by SC.
Regards,
Keith
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Do you know if this will be added at a later time? I need to do 3 clones from the same DB and now will not be able to automate this using SnapCreator.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
So you need 3 sets of clones? And for them to be deleted in by separate configs?
We can certainly add this as feature request for future, shouldnt be too difficult
Regards,
Keith
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Yes, that is correct.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Ok I will get with the devs. I think simply changing clone naming convention to cl_<config>_<volume>_<timestamp> would allow this to work.
Regards,
Keith
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Has this been fixed in the new release?
migration has accepted the solution
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Yep SC 3.5 supports this. We changed the naming convention for clones to allow it to be more flexible. Just a warning done have a "-" in your config name, as that isnt allowed in a clone name and we now use config name as part of clone name.
Regards,
Keith
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Is an underscore ok in the name?
