Pete, et al, My apologies for disseminating bad information, and thanks for the clarification. ..Paul
At 01:08 PM 2/14/2012, Pete Tanenhaus wrote: >Actually this really isn't correct, a snapshot differential backup will >detect deleted files and will expire them on the TSM server. > >Periodic full progressive incremental backups are recommended because "less >complete" backups such as snapdiff, >incremental by date, and JBB can never be as comprehensive as a full >progressive given that a full progressive examines >every file on the local file system and every file in the TSM server >inventory. > >Note that "less complete" implies that changes processed by a full >progressive might be missed by other "less complete" >backup methods, and this is the reasoning behind recommending periodic full >progressive incrementals. > >JBB is somewhat better in that in makes every attempt to detect conditions >which indicate that the change journal is out of >sync with what has previously been backed up and to automatically force the >full progressive incremental backup instead >of requiring the user to manually schedule it. > >For reasons that require a very detailed explanation (let me know if you >are interested), the current snapdiff implementation >doesn't have the robustness or resiliency that JBB does and therefore >really requires manually scheduling full progressive >incremental backups via the CreateNewBase option. > >Hope this helps ... > >Pete Tanenhaus >Tivoli Storage Manager Client Development >email: [email protected] >tieline: 320.8778, external: 607.754.4213 > >"Those who refuse to challenge authority are condemned to conform to it" > > >|------------> >| From: | >|------------> > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| > |Paul Zarnowski <[email protected]> > | > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| >|------------> >| To: | >|------------> > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| > |[email protected] > | > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| >|------------> >| Date: | >|------------> > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| > |02/14/2012 07:12 AM > | > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| >|------------> >| Subject: | >|------------> > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| > |Re: Need some support for snapdiff RFE's > | > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| >|------------> >| Sent by: | >|------------> > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| > |"ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[email protected]> > | > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| > > > > > >Grant, > >The time stamps are not updated, because a snapdiff incremental does not >deactivate deleted files. You need to do periodic 'createnewbase' to do >this, which walks the file system and updates the time stamps. > >..Paul > >On Feb 14, 2012, at 12:32 AM, "Grant Street" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hello >> >> Just thought I would plug two snapdiff RFE's(Request For Enhancement) >> that I created on the IBM developer works site. >> >> I am trying to garner some support for these in the hope that they will >> be implemented in the future. >> >> I have seen that some of you have had experience with Netapp snapdiff >> backups and you may have similar beliefs. >> >> "Define snapdiff and other snap options on a per filesystem basis rather >> than per backup command" >> When running an incremental backup be able to define the snapdiff or >> other snap option on a per filesystem basis rather than for the whole >> backup incremental job. >> >> >http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/rfe/execute?use_case=viewRfe&CR_ID=12858 >> >> "Snapdiff to update last backup fields in filespace data" >> Could you please update the TSM snapdiff client to update the lastbackup >> information of filespaces when a "query filespace f=d" is issued. This >> would be the obvious behaviour and would be inline with the documented >> meaning of the columns >> >> >http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/rfe/execute?use_case=viewRfe&CR_ID=13145 >> >> TIA >> >> Grant -- Paul Zarnowski Ph: 607-255-4757 Manager, Storage Services Fx: 607-255-8521 719 Rhodes Hall, Ithaca, NY 14853-3801 Em: [email protected]
