I'm still getting used to the way Tivoli organizes things.  I've installed
what was in LATEST from .../maintenance/...  Should I get the latest from
.../patches/... instead?


At 09:40 AM 9/12/2000 -0400, you wrote:
>What version of TSM 3.7.?.? What operating system. We are using Windows NT
>with TSM version 3.7 on our server and a combination of 3.7.1.0 and
>3.7.2.01 on the clients (I am slowly getting rid of the 3.7.1.0 clients due
>to the fact that the exclude statements are ignored.) Going to release
>3.7.2.01 als fixes several other problems with 3.7.1.0 (I think I have a
>copy of what PMR's release 3.7.2.01 has if you like)
>
>Sean Duffy
>Network Analyst
>Alcatel Canada TA
>
>mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
>
>                     Fred Johanson
>                     <[EMAIL PROTECTED]        To:     [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>                     ICAGO.EDU>              cc:
>                     Sent by: "ADSM:         Subject:     Excludes in TSM
>                     Dist Stor
>                     Manager"
>                     <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>                     T.EDU>
>
>
>                     09/11/00 12:56
>                     PM
>                     Please respond
>                     to "ADSM: Dist
>                     Stor Manager"
>
>
>
>
>
>Last week, I upgraded my server to TSM V3R7.  The client had been TSM for
>months and seems to have had no problem with the exclude file, which looks
>like
>
>EXclude  /adsmdb/.../*
>EXclude  /adsmlog/.../*
>EXclude  /adsmstgpool1/.../*
>EXclude  /adsmstgpool2/.../*
>
>         ...
>
>EXclude  /adsmarch/.../*
>
>I'd done an incremental before the upgrade and the occupancy for V3R1 was
>about 4Gb.  After the upgrade, I started another incremental.  I waited a
>reasonable length of time and I checked: 4Gb and still going.  It kept
>going all afternoon, and the q sess showed 10Gb, 15Gb, etc.  It was still
>run when I got home and it ran all night.  The next morning, q sess showed
>100Gb and counting.  Q fi showed that it had processed a 30Gb and a 18Gb
>storagepool.  What led me to cancel was the q occ of the node, which showed
>that the process had backedup both storage pools and was starting on the
>DB.  The pattern of the excludes has been working since V2R1, but suddenly
>something seems to have gone wrong.  Have I missed something?
>
>
>Fred Johanson
>System Administrator, ADSM
>S.E.A.
>University of Chicago
>773-702-8464

Fred Johanson
System Administrator, ADSM
S.E.A.
University of Chicago
773-702-8464

Reply via email to