That article is certainly a good read. But what I got out of it was that
deleted item retention is also fairly useless. If a mailbox is deleted
at all (via accident by an admin or on purpose because an employee
left), it is painful to restore it (restore entire server to a separate
box method).

Even if mail is deleted, it seems to me a lot of times it's lost
forever. As soon as you empty your deleted items folder (something users
do all the time), you can no longer retrieve that email. That makes it
pretty easy to still make individual mail restores a desirable feature.

I've never heard of the IBM Content Manager. Anyone have any experience
with what it is and how it helps in this case?

So all in all the only reason one might argue the TDP for Exchange is
better then the Veritas solution is performance in restores and backups.
Does anyone have real numbers on how much better it is in this case?

I've found this argument to be pretty weak amongst customers chosing
between Veritas and TSM as a backup solution. Exchange always seems to
be an important piece influencing their decision and they would gladly
give up performance and gain the higher level of granularity.


-----Original Message-----
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of
Bill Mansfield
Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 1:57 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: TDP for exchange vs Veritas hot backups

This topic should generate some interest <g>

The cited analysis is interesting, but out of date (V3.7.2).  Also, the
methodology is suspect, especially considering a Veritas engineer was
onsite to set up NBU but they set up TSM from the manuals.

There is a readable and comprehensive article on Exchange 5.5 deleted
object restore at
http://www.exchangeadmin.com/Articles/Index.cfm?ArticleID=7922&Key=Outlo
ok%20Deleted%20Items


As I understand it, the admin enables the "deleted items cache" and
deleted
emails live there awhile, easily restorable by the user.  If this
facility
isn't enabled or doesn't work, the Microsoft supported approach for
getting
deleted mail back is to restore the entire Exchange server on another
box.
Not good.

Veritas and some others use a messaging interface to capture emails and
back them up.  This interface was never intended for backup, and is very
slow for both backup and restore.  But it does work, and the vendors do
keep up with Microsoft breakage.

At the last IBM storage conference, this came up, and the recommended
approach was to use IBM Content Manager CommonStore for Exchange Server.
If anybody has done this perhaps you could post results.

_____________________________
William Mansfield
Senior Consultant
Solution Technology, Inc




                    "Malbrough,
                    Demetrius"           To:     [EMAIL PROTECTED]
                    <DMalbrough@TT       cc:
                    IINC.COM>            Subject:     Re: TDP for
exchange vs Veritas hot backups
                    Sent by:
                    "ADSM: Dist
                    Stor Manager"
                    <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
                    IST.EDU>


                    12/21/2001
                    02:15 PM
                    Please respond
                    to "ADSM: Dist
                    Stor Manager"






Also, Gerald!  This may be off the topic but there was a nice analysis
done on TSM vs. Veritas!  You can view it at:

http://www.keylabs.com/results/veritas/veritas.html

Regards,

Demetrius Malbrough
UNIX/TSM Administrator

-----Original Message-----
From: Gerald Wichmann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 1:44 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: TDP for exchange vs Veritas hot backups


I find this is the hardest thing to sell among potential customers who
are considering both platforms (TSM vs Veritas). The reason tends to be
that Veritas's hotbackup solution will do a higher level of granularity
in restores - something companies in our experience definetly prefer.
Being able to restore a mailbox seems to weigh heavily in favor of
Veritas - or at least that's been my experience.

Now I know some of the arguments against it. E.g. it's not officially
supported my Microsoft and therefore if Microsoft makes a change to the
backup API or to Exchange, it could break their hot backups altogether.
This argument I find is of limited use because most companies who've
been using it have never experienced this problem and can easily argue
right back that Veritas will quickly patch the product such that it does
work.

One of the arguments regarding mailbox restores is also to use
Microsoft's deleted retention parameter so that the exchange server
holds onto deleted messages for a period of time before officially
purging them. That way they are recoverable without having to do a
restore of the server. My understanding of this feature though is to do
a mailbox recovery, it is still very painful and involves another
exchange server? I would love it if someone more knowledgable could give
me the low-down on how the deleted retention actually works when a mail
or mailbox needs to be recovered once it was deleted. How do you go
about recovering them?

Another argument is the speed of backups and restores. My understanding
is Veritas's hotback up much slower to do backups and restore. However
I've never seen any numbers nor have I had the opportunity to test this
myself. Exactly how big a difference is this? Does anyone have any real
tests or numbers or is this also a fairly week argument?

Thanks for the help!

Reply via email to