Classics Forum

Re: "Possible inconsistencies in table_name" in HD

Posted By: ART KAGEL, BLOOMBERG/ 731 LEXIN
Date: Tuesday, 12 December 2006, at 3:05 p.m.

Wrong forum. Mostly ISQL and 4GL programmers monitor this. Repost to the IDS
Forum or the comp.databases.informix newsgroup (or it's email gateway
informix-list@iiug.org). Several HDR experts, including sometimes Madison
Pruett who 'owns' IDS replication, monitor those forums and will reply. You
should also open a support case with IBM.

Art S. Kagel

----- Original Message -----
From: Long Nguyen <classics@iiug.org>
At: 12/11 21:17:21

Hi all,
About a month ago I sent this issue to IIUG. But so far haven't got any=

suggestion!.
I hope to find some "comrades" or IBM Informix support people who have
encountered this HDR message before and could tell me what are the caus=
es
and how to resolve.
Truly yours,
Long N.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
----- Forwarded by Long Nguyen/HO/STAFF/MINet on 12/12/2006 12:11 PM --=
---

=

=20

Long Nguyen =

=20

To: classics@iiug.=
org =20

14/11/2006 12:51 cc: =

=20

PM Subject: "Possible inco=
nsistencies in table_name" in =20

HDR log file =

=20

=

=20

Hi all,
We use HDR/ER in our systems.
Recently we often get these messages in the DR log file:

12:17:03 Results: Possible inconsistencies in 'esser:"informix".stosh=
ipd
12:17:03 Action: Run 'oncheck -cDI esser:"informix".stoshipd
12:17:03 stack trace for pid 6462 written to /tmp/af.42dc78e
12:17:03 See Also: /tmp/af.42dc78e
12:17:07 Page Check Error in bfput
12:17:07 invoke_alarm(): /bin/sh -c '/usr/informix-10.00.FC4/alarm.sh =
5 6
"Internal Subsystem failure: 'MT'" "Page Check Error in bfput"

Run "oncheck ?cDI esser:stoshipd" on the DR site and get the messages:
ERROR: Index i6oshipd for esser:informix.stoshipd is bad.
Please check index 'esser:informix.stoshipd#i6oshipd' on DR primary ser=
ver.
If the index is ok on DR primary server, it does not need to be rebuilt=
,
but can be transferred to DR secondary server by running "onmode -d ind=
ex
...." command on the DR site.

Every time we have to run "onmode ?d index" to replicate the index from=
the
Primary site to the Secondary (DR) site. But this transfer cannot be do=
ne
for tables that are heavily accessed during the day, as it will lock th=
e
access to that index during the transfer.

Have any of you ever experienced this "inconsistencies" problem in your=
HDR
system?
Any long time solution please.

Cheers,
Long Nguyen.
Informix AP
Australia.

=

*******************************************************************************
Forum Note: Use "Reply" to post a response in the discussion forum.

Messages In This Thread

• Re: "Possible inconsistencies in table_name" in HD
  ART KAGEL, BLOOMBERG/ 731 LEXIN -- Tuesday, 12 December 2006, at 3:05 p.m.
  • Re: "Possible inconsistencies in table_name" i....
    Jonathan Leffler -- Thursday, 14 December 2006, at 1:24 a.m.
    • Re: "Possible inconsistencies in table_name" i....
      Long Nguyen -- Thursday, 14 December 2006, at 2:01 a.m.
      • Re: "Possible inconsistencies in table_name" i....
        Jonathan Leffler -- Thursday, 14 December 2006, at 2:09 a.m.

Classics Forum is maintained by Administrator with WebBBS 5.12.