Hee hee! THANK YOU Andy! Wanda ;>) On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 1:53 PM, Andrew Raibeck <[email protected]> wrote:
> > It should be getting obvious to development that this architecture is > > doomed, and not gonna work for folks in the long term. Benefits we pick > up > > with the DB performance improvements in 6.1 (yes, it does run really > really > > fast!), will be immediately swallowed up by Win2008 system state.... > > We want to make sure your TSM databases are fully utilized. :-) > > Actually the first sentence above is spot on: We understand the impact of > system state backup for Windows, especially post-Windows 2003 (Vista and > up) and are actively seeking a solution. At this time I do not have any > target timeframe for this, but we do consider it a high priority. > > Best regards, > > Andy > > Andy Raibeck > IBM Software Group > Tivoli Storage Manager Client Product Development > Level 3 Team Lead > Internal Notes e-mail: Andrew Raibeck/Hartford/i...@ibmus > Internet e-mail: [email protected] > > IBM Tivoli Storage Manager support web page: > > http://www.ibm.com/software/sysmgmt/products/support/IBMTivoliStorageManager.html > > > The only dumb question is the one that goes unasked. > The command line is your friend. > "Good enough" is the enemy of excellence. > > "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[email protected]> wrote on 11/05/2009 > 02:29:10 PM: > > > [image removed] > > > > Re: Win2008 System State > > > > Wanda Prather > > > > to: > > > > ADSM-L > > > > 11/05/2009 02:29 PM > > > > Sent by: > > > > "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[email protected]> > > > > Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" > > > > Yes, systemstate backups have always been fulls. (I believe there was > some > > mumbling about Win2K3 changing something to make it possible to do > > incrementals instead of fulls, but I've never seen any difference, and no > > further mumbling has ensued...sort of like the mumbling that told us > Vista > > would be better than those XP annoyances...) > > > > What you have NOT mentioned is the impact of SystemState backups on the > TSM > > DB, because in WIn2K the systemstate backup is at least 2000 objects. > Per > > systemstate backup, meaning per day. Couple thousand more for 2003. > > Anybody figured out the number for 2008? > > > > I've had customers where I've found a SUBSTANTIAL percentage of their TSM > DB > > taken up with (pretty useless) system state backups, with just WIn2K and > > Win2K3. Win2008 will blow up a lot of TSM data bases, looks like. > > > > And I've recently run into customers that have put WIndows on the C: > drive, > > installed their Apps (including TSM) on the D: drive. But adsm.sys > always > > goes on the boot (C:) drive, which then frequently runs out of disk > space, > > causing the backup schedule to fail. > > > > The only defences I've come up with: > > > > 1) turn off the systemstate backup with DOMAIN -systemstate, and add > > preschedulecmd to invoke ntbackup of systemstate to a flat file, which > can > > be directed to any drive, not just C: ALso has the advantage that > > systemstate becomes ONE object, not thousands > > > > 2) bind systemstate backups to a mgmt class that keeps only a limited > number > > of versions, especially if in a client domain with otherwise long > retention > > times. > > > > It should be getting obvious to development that this architecture is > > doomed, and not gonna work for folks in the long term. Benefits we pick > up > > with the DB performance improvements in 6.1 (yes, it does run really > really > > fast!), will be immediately swallowed up by Win2008 system state.... > > > > W >
