Hans, Del already stated that it (online system state restored) were already against Microsofts best practice so I think the problem here is with Microsoft not wanting you to do this rather than with IBM following their guidelines.
I understand why IBM can't fully support something that they might need support on from the manufacturer, in this case Microsoft if the manufacturer states that it is not best practice to do so, any resulting issue will be an issue from IBM to fix, probably with little to no support from Microsoft. And for IBM to keep something in their backup/recovery solution that is basically best effort is probably not smart. I have seen issues with other backup vendors that implement all kinds of tricks that Microsoft doesn't support that work very well until they don't, and then you get trouble, lot's of it. On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 12:42 PM, Hans Christian Riksheim <[email protected] > wrote: > I am not sure if I follow. Has Microsoft communicated a change in its > support for systemstate restores or is it just IBMs decision to not bother > with it anymore? > > Hans Chr. > > On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 9:08 PM, Del Hoobler <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi Martin, > > > > It's true IBM Spectrum Protect did support online system state restores > > before, but it is against Microsoft's best practices to support it. IBM > > Spectrum Protect 8.1 is more strictly enforcing the documented best > > practices from Microsoft for system state restores. > > > > IBM did not drop the API support for LoP BE specifically so that Data > > Protection for SAP HANA on Power BE continues to be supported. However, > > IBM's strategic direction is LoP LE ( > > https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/library/l- > power-little-endian-faq-trs/ > > ). Both SAP and Data Protection for SAP HANA have LoP LE support on the > > roadmap for 1H17. Your investment in Linux on Power is safe, it is just > > that the software will switch to LE architecture from current BE > > architecture in the future. > > > > Del > > > > ---------------------------------------------------- > > > > "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[email protected]> wrote on 12/12/2016 > > 10:18:18 AM: > > > > > From: Martin Janosik <[email protected]> > > > To: [email protected] > > > Date: 12/12/2016 10:19 AM > > > Subject: Re: ISP 81 Discontinued functions > > > Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[email protected]> > > > > > > I'm also a bit nervous and curoius at the same time about discontinued > > > functions, namely: > > > Online system state restores - You can no longer restore the system > > state > > > on a system that is online. Instead, use the Automated System Recovery > > > (ASR) based recovery method to restore the system state in offline > > Windows > > > Preinstallation Environment (PE) mode. > > > and > > > The following operating systems are no longer supported by the > > > backup-archive client: > > > Linux on Power Systems™ (big endian). You can still use the IBM > Spectrum > > > Protect API on Linux on Power Systems (big endian). > > > > > > What is the idea behind "to be competive with x86 platform and get > > > compativility certification for SAP HANA with Linux on Power platform > > (Big > > > Endian)" (ref. > > > https://blogs.saphana.com/2015/08/21/announcing-general- > > > availability-of-sap-hana-on-ibm-power-systems/ > > > ) and then 1.5 year later drop support of BAclient for OS"? > > > > > > We deployed 10+ big SAP HANA on Power8 instances last year, and now we > > will > > > be getting "not supported" for new releases? > > > > > > M. Janosik > > > > > > "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[email protected]> wrote on 12/09/2016 > > > 02:45:34 PM: > > > > > > > From: Chavdar Cholev <[email protected]> > > > > To: [email protected] > > > > Date: 12/09/2016 02:47 PM > > > > Subject: [ADSM-L] ISP 81 Discontinued functions > > > > Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > Does some one check discontinued functions in new version... > > > > especially part of no VM backup as standard function in BA client.... > > > > It is not good at all. TDP for Virtual environment for hyper-V creats > > > diff > > > > hdds (.avhdx) > > > > and my customers will not be happy with this, because you have to > > merge > > > > these file, > > > > when you need to expand .vhdx disk for example .... > > > > > > > > :( > > > > Regards > > > > Cahvdar > > > > > > > > > > >
