Implied Hold vs HOLD -Any drawback?

[SV]

Has a requirement to apply hold for all documents and release at document level when certain event happens. Also, reload should happen when certain percentage of docs are out of hold and met the retention.

I thought I can use implied_hold to add a default hold during load. But IBM document says (pasted below), use implied hold if you are using another solution for retention management.

-What is best approach for my requirement.
- Any disadvantage of using implied-hold.
- If implied hold is used, will it cause any CMOD functionality like reload to stop.
- Also when I used Implied-Hold, hold field displays a value of 16384.

Holds
You indicate, through the use of searches, the specific documents that you want to hold. You can apply holds to documents in any application group. Use this type of hold if you are using Content Manager OnDemand as your retention management tool.

Implied holds
When Content Manager OnDemand loads documents, it applies a hold to all the documents in that load. You can apply this type of hold only to documents in new application groups. Use this type of hold if you are using another solution as your retention management tool.

[Lars Bencze]

Hi SV,

The Lockdown value of 16384 is correct. To my understanding, the Implied Holds are never stored in the ARSHOLDMAP table (as regular holds are), instead this high number uniquely identifies that there is an implied hold set on the document, without having to consult named table.

We have done some work trying to set regular holds on all documents. If you have several millions of documents, this is going to take quite a while.
Once we were done, we also experienced significant performance degradation, especially for arsdoc hold_release and arsdoc get, but also for arsadmin unloads.

So if you are happy with the Implied Holds, I'd suggest you go with them - it will put less burden on your system.

(Also, to my understanding, you ARE using another system to manage/initiate document retention - the system that generates or "masters" those "certain events" that you describe. Could it be your CRM system perhaps, or another LoB system? Go for Implied Holds.)

The only real drawback with Implied Holds that I have found so far is this scenario:
1. You remove the Implied Hold for a document, due to "a certain event" has happened.
2. You realise that you accidentally removed the hold from the wrong document (horreur!)
3a. The document gets deleted and you need to restore it. Bugger.
3b. You find out in time, before the document is deleted, but you can not restore the Implied hold because there is no command to do that.
(No, arsdoc hold_add -x IMPLIED_HOLD won't work. (Can't recall by heart if it is -x or -l <hold_name>))
4. To rescue the document you need to either:
 a. Add a regular hold to the doc, and an explanation why it has been set on this document, or;
 b. export and reload the document, so it gets a new Implied hold set on it, then delete/unload the original.

Good luck with ERM!

[SV]

Lars,
Thanks for your response.


The plan is to add 7 years of retention and add implied hold to all docs
Another application to provide daily / weekly feed of Documents to be released.
In CMOD run arsdoc hold_release for the list.
Run weekly expiration, after the hold_release.

So again the follow up question is, in using implied hold, will cmod run auto reload upon X percentage documents deleted?

Also, can  this hold/ hold_release hold be achieved without ERM by setting the retention to never expire and delete the docs using 'arsdoc delete' upon the event trigger?