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:
Post your ideas
Post ideas and requests to enhance a product or service. Take a look at ideas others have posted and upvote them if they matter to you,
Post an idea
Upvote ideas that matter most to you
Get feedback from the IBM team to refine your idea
Help IBM prioritize your ideas and requests
The IBM team may need your help to refine the ideas so they may ask for more information or feedback. The product management team will then decide if they can begin working on your idea. If they can start during the next development cycle, they will put the idea on the priority list. Each team at IBM works on a different schedule, where some ideas can be implemented right away, others may be placed on a different schedule.
Receive notification on the decision
Some ideas can be implemented at IBM, while others may not fit within the development plans for the product. In either case, the team will let you know as soon as possible. In some cases, we may be able to find alternatives for ideas which cannot be implemented in a reasonable time.
Current, for L1 (or L2) backups we need to read all pages. This is highly inefficient and there are alternatives for implementing this. In the PMR we've been told this matches old FEA idsdb00010525. In this the proposed solution was to maintain a timestamp in the partition header. This could be used to avoid partitions not changed since the last backup. The downside of this solution would be that for big partitions with just a few changed pages we would still include them on the list.
Another possibility would be to implement something like Oracle's Block Change Tracking which is described in detail here:
and in the Oracle product documentation. This would be the best approach from an efficiency perspective, and we could do it in the bitmap pages (which would need to be extended). The downside of this would be that the physical page layout (for the bitmaps would need to be changed).
Either soultion would be MUCH better than what we have now. First one would work for static historic data... and seems simpler to implement (an INSERT and DELETE already need to change the partition header... not sure about an UPDATE or other activities)
Customer complains that there isn't much advantage in using L1 as they're very slow.
Do not place IBM confidential, company confidential, or personal information into any field.