Re: Fw: TSM being abandoned?

[Remco Post]

Nicholas Cassimatis wrote:
> As an appliance, I call that Hardware, as in it's a device outside of the
> host getting the service, performing the service.

You can call an apple a pear, but that will not make it so.

Now, more to the point, of course an appliance doing exactly one task
(dedup incoming data) can be implemented to be faster than an appliance
doing a multitude of tasks on the same amount of hardware. Remember that
most TSM servers are sized for their current task, adding dedup to that
will increase workload. My bet is that when TSM includes dedup, you will
find that if you add the same amount of resources to your TSM server as
you will find in your dedup appliance, (CPU, memory, I/O bandwidth) TSM
can perform those tasks plus it's own tasks just as well as a separeate
TSM server and dedup appliance.


--
Met vriendelijke groeten,

Remco Post, PLCS

Re: Copypool Tape Ownership

[Haberstroh, Debbie (IT)]

No, currently I only have 1 TSM server.

-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
Andy Huebner
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 4:00 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Copypool Tape Ownership


Do you use a Configuration Manager in your environment?


Andy Huebner

-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Haberstroh, Debbie (IT)
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 3:53 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Copypool Tape Ownership

I have found several different papers but one that I have referred to
was written by Allen S. Rout, 50 ways.  He lists several different ways
to migrate to a new server and this is one of them.  I haven't read
anything about splitting the Configuration Manager.  As for the MCs,
since I am restoring the database and not changing the management
classes, I don't believe that they will need to rebind but if I am
wrong, someone please let me know.

-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
Andy Huebner
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 3:21 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Copypool Tape Ownership


Is there a paper on this method?
How would you split a server that is the Configuration Manager?  How
would TSM handle the "change" to the MCs?  Would there we issues with
retention or rebinding of objects.

Andy Huebner
-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Haberstroh, Debbie (IT)
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 2:38 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Copypool Tape Ownership

That's what I needed, thanks.

-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
Chris Koster
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 2:19 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Copypool Tape Ownership


You will have to decide which one of the instances will keep the
original copypool. For the other instance(s), blow away the offsite
copypool and generate a new one with BACKUP STGPOOL  .  

I would suggest assigning the current copypool to the instance which
owns the largest dataset (ie. Mail TDP).

-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Haberstroh, Debbie (IT)
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 1:48 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: [ADSM-L] Copypool Tape Ownership

Hi All,

We are going to be moving our current TSM DB to a new server and
breaking it up into separate instances so that the databases will be
smaller. Our plan is to restore the DB as in a DR and then remove the
nodes and policy domains that will be on the 2nd instance, in essence
separating the DB.   Currently my tapes are collocated by node in the
tapepool (library) but the copypool (offsite) is not.  I know that for
the library I need to change ownership of the tapes to the new server(s)
but am not sure what happens with the copypool tapes.  I don't believe
that the different servers can track files on the same tape.  I have
read papers on using this method but have not found a reference on how
to handle the offsite tapes.  Can someone please point me in the right
direction?  Thanks.

Debbie Haberstroh
Server Administration
Northrop Grumman Information Technology 
Commercial, State & Local (CSL)
972-946-5639


This e-mail (including any attachments) is confidential and may be
legally privileged. If you are not an intended recipient or an
authorized representative of an intended recipient, you are prohibited
from using, copying or distributing the information in this e-mail or
its attachments. If you have received this e-mail in error, please
notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and delete all copies of
this message and any attachments.
Thank you.


This e-mail (including any attachments) is confidential and may be legally 
privileged. If you are not an intended recipient or an authorized 
representative of an intended recipient, you are prohibited from using, copying 
or distributing the information in this e-mail or its attachments. If you have 
received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by return 
e-mail and delete all copies of this message and any attachments.
Thank you.

Re: Copypool Tape Ownership

[Andy Huebner]

Do you use a Configuration Manager in your environment?


Andy Huebner

-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Haberstroh, Debbie (IT)
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 3:53 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Copypool Tape Ownership

I have found several different papers but one that I have referred to
was written by Allen S. Rout, 50 ways.  He lists several different ways
to migrate to a new server and this is one of them.  I haven't read
anything about splitting the Configuration Manager.  As for the MCs,
since I am restoring the database and not changing the management
classes, I don't believe that they will need to rebind but if I am
wrong, someone please let me know.

-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
Andy Huebner
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 3:21 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Copypool Tape Ownership


Is there a paper on this method?
How would you split a server that is the Configuration Manager?  How
would TSM handle the "change" to the MCs?  Would there we issues with
retention or rebinding of objects.

Andy Huebner
-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Haberstroh, Debbie (IT)
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 2:38 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Copypool Tape Ownership

That's what I needed, thanks.

-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
Chris Koster
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 2:19 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Copypool Tape Ownership


You will have to decide which one of the instances will keep the
original copypool. For the other instance(s), blow away the offsite
copypool and generate a new one with BACKUP STGPOOL  .  

I would suggest assigning the current copypool to the instance which
owns the largest dataset (ie. Mail TDP).

-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Haberstroh, Debbie (IT)
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 1:48 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: [ADSM-L] Copypool Tape Ownership

Hi All,

We are going to be moving our current TSM DB to a new server and
breaking it up into separate instances so that the databases will be
smaller. Our plan is to restore the DB as in a DR and then remove the
nodes and policy domains that will be on the 2nd instance, in essence
separating the DB.   Currently my tapes are collocated by node in the
tapepool (library) but the copypool (offsite) is not.  I know that for
the library I need to change ownership of the tapes to the new server(s)
but am not sure what happens with the copypool tapes.  I don't believe
that the different servers can track files on the same tape.  I have
read papers on using this method but have not found a reference on how
to handle the offsite tapes.  Can someone please point me in the right
direction?  Thanks.

Debbie Haberstroh
Server Administration
Northrop Grumman Information Technology 
Commercial, State & Local (CSL)
972-946-5639


This e-mail (including any attachments) is confidential and may be
legally privileged. If you are not an intended recipient or an
authorized representative of an intended recipient, you are prohibited
from using, copying or distributing the information in this e-mail or
its attachments. If you have received this e-mail in error, please
notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and delete all copies of
this message and any attachments.
Thank you.


This e-mail (including any attachments) is confidential and may be legally 
privileged. If you are not an intended recipient or an authorized 
representative of an intended recipient, you are prohibited from using, copying 
or distributing the information in this e-mail or its attachments. If you have 
received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by return 
e-mail and delete all copies of this message and any attachments.
Thank you.

Re: Copypool Tape Ownership

[Haberstroh, Debbie (IT)]

I have found several different papers but one that I have referred to was 
written by Allen S. Rout, 50 ways.  He lists several different ways to migrate 
to a new server and this is one of them.  I haven't read anything about 
splitting the Configuration Manager.  As for the MCs, since I am restoring the 
database and not changing the management classes, I don't believe that they 
will need to rebind but if I am wrong, someone please let me know.

-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
Andy Huebner
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 3:21 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Copypool Tape Ownership


Is there a paper on this method?
How would you split a server that is the Configuration Manager?  How
would TSM handle the "change" to the MCs?  Would there we issues with
retention or rebinding of objects.

Andy Huebner
-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Haberstroh, Debbie (IT)
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 2:38 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Copypool Tape Ownership

That's what I needed, thanks.

-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
Chris Koster
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 2:19 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Copypool Tape Ownership


You will have to decide which one of the instances will keep the
original copypool. For the other instance(s), blow away the offsite
copypool and generate a new one with BACKUP STGPOOL  .  

I would suggest assigning the current copypool to the instance which
owns the largest dataset (ie. Mail TDP).

-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Haberstroh, Debbie (IT)
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 1:48 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: [ADSM-L] Copypool Tape Ownership

Hi All,

We are going to be moving our current TSM DB to a new server and
breaking it up into separate instances so that the databases will be
smaller. Our plan is to restore the DB as in a DR and then remove the
nodes and policy domains that will be on the 2nd instance, in essence
separating the DB.   Currently my tapes are collocated by node in the
tapepool (library) but the copypool (offsite) is not.  I know that for
the library I need to change ownership of the tapes to the new server(s)
but am not sure what happens with the copypool tapes.  I don't believe
that the different servers can track files on the same tape.  I have
read papers on using this method but have not found a reference on how
to handle the offsite tapes.  Can someone please point me in the right
direction?  Thanks.

Debbie Haberstroh
Server Administration
Northrop Grumman Information Technology 
Commercial, State & Local (CSL)
972-946-5639


This e-mail (including any attachments) is confidential and may be legally 
privileged. If you are not an intended recipient or an authorized 
representative of an intended recipient, you are prohibited from using, copying 
or distributing the information in this e-mail or its attachments. If you have 
received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by return 
e-mail and delete all copies of this message and any attachments.
Thank you.

Fw: TSM being abandoned?

[Nicholas Cassimatis]

As an appliance, I call that Hardware, as in it's a device outside of the
host getting the service, performing the service.  I can also see why you
call it Software - it is running on a General Purpose processor, etc.
You're right on with the fact that they're specifically architected to do
exactly what they do, and to perform that function as well as they can.

The DeDupe coming in TSM will be good enough for some customers, and no
where close to adequate for others.  Same thing with tape management,
reporting, encryption, an just about every other feature.  As usual in the
IT world, you have to evaluate needs, see what's out there, and decide what
is the best solution for your environment.  One size definitely doesn't fit
all.

Or, as my dad likes to say, "If it was easy, they wouldn't call it 'work'!"

Nick Cassimatis

- Forwarded by Nicholas Cassimatis/Raleigh/IBM on 04/17/2008 04:02 PM
-

"ADSM: Dist Stor Manager"  wrote on 04/17/2008
02:29:00 PM:

> [image removed]
>
> Re: Fw: TSM being abandoned?
>
> Curtis Preston
>
> to:
>
> ADSM-L
>
> 04/17/2008 02:34 PM
>
> Sent by:
>
> "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" 
>
> Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager"
>
> To my knowledge, almost all (if not ALL) the VTLs/IDTs are just Linux
> kernels running tape emulation and dedupe software inside a server.  So
> I don't really see this as a software vs hardware debate, as it's really
> all software. It's more along the lines of design goals and
> single-mindedness.  VTL vendors knew they had to run at 100s or 1000s of
> MB/s, so that's what they designed for -- and they had to bet big or go
> home.  The backup software dedupe products, OTOH, were designed mainly
> to back up remote offices, which has very different design goals.  In
> addition, they had many other products to get right as well.
>
> ---
> W. Curtis Preston
> Backup Blog @ www.backupcentral.com
> VP Data Protection, GlassHouse Technologies
>

Re: Copypool Tape Ownership

[Andy Huebner]

Is there a paper on this method?
How would you split a server that is the Configuration Manager?  How
would TSM handle the "change" to the MCs?  Would there we issues with
retention or rebinding of objects.

Andy Huebner
-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Haberstroh, Debbie (IT)
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 2:38 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Copypool Tape Ownership

That's what I needed, thanks.

-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
Chris Koster
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 2:19 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Copypool Tape Ownership


You will have to decide which one of the instances will keep the
original copypool. For the other instance(s), blow away the offsite
copypool and generate a new one with BACKUP STGPOOL  .  

I would suggest assigning the current copypool to the instance which
owns the largest dataset (ie. Mail TDP).

-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Haberstroh, Debbie (IT)
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 1:48 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: [ADSM-L] Copypool Tape Ownership

Hi All,

We are going to be moving our current TSM DB to a new server and
breaking it up into separate instances so that the databases will be
smaller. Our plan is to restore the DB as in a DR and then remove the
nodes and policy domains that will be on the 2nd instance, in essence
separating the DB.   Currently my tapes are collocated by node in the
tapepool (library) but the copypool (offsite) is not.  I know that for
the library I need to change ownership of the tapes to the new server(s)
but am not sure what happens with the copypool tapes.  I don't believe
that the different servers can track files on the same tape.  I have
read papers on using this method but have not found a reference on how
to handle the offsite tapes.  Can someone please point me in the right
direction?  Thanks.

Debbie Haberstroh
Server Administration
Northrop Grumman Information Technology 
Commercial, State & Local (CSL)
972-946-5639


This e-mail (including any attachments) is confidential and may be legally 
privileged. If you are not an intended recipient or an authorized 
representative of an intended recipient, you are prohibited from using, copying 
or distributing the information in this e-mail or its attachments. If you have 
received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by return 
e-mail and delete all copies of this message and any attachments.
Thank you.

Re: Copypool Tape Ownership

[Haberstroh, Debbie (IT)]

That's what I needed, thanks.

-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
Chris Koster
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 2:19 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Copypool Tape Ownership


You will have to decide which one of the instances will keep the
original copypool. For the other instance(s), blow away the offsite
copypool and generate a new one with BACKUP STGPOOL  .  

I would suggest assigning the current copypool to the instance which
owns the largest dataset (ie. Mail TDP).

-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Haberstroh, Debbie (IT)
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 1:48 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: [ADSM-L] Copypool Tape Ownership

Hi All,

We are going to be moving our current TSM DB to a new server and
breaking it up into separate instances so that the databases will be
smaller. Our plan is to restore the DB as in a DR and then remove the
nodes and policy domains that will be on the 2nd instance, in essence
separating the DB.   Currently my tapes are collocated by node in the
tapepool (library) but the copypool (offsite) is not.  I know that for
the library I need to change ownership of the tapes to the new server(s)
but am not sure what happens with the copypool tapes.  I don't believe
that the different servers can track files on the same tape.  I have
read papers on using this method but have not found a reference on how
to handle the offsite tapes.  Can someone please point me in the right
direction?  Thanks.

Debbie Haberstroh
Server Administration
Northrop Grumman Information Technology 
Commercial, State & Local (CSL)
972-946-5639

Re: Copypool Tape Ownership

[Chris Koster]

You will have to decide which one of the instances will keep the
original copypool. For the other instance(s), blow away the offsite
copypool and generate a new one with BACKUP STGPOOL  .  

I would suggest assigning the current copypool to the instance which
owns the largest dataset (ie. Mail TDP).

-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Haberstroh, Debbie (IT)
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 1:48 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: [ADSM-L] Copypool Tape Ownership

Hi All,

We are going to be moving our current TSM DB to a new server and
breaking it up into separate instances so that the databases will be
smaller. Our plan is to restore the DB as in a DR and then remove the
nodes and policy domains that will be on the 2nd instance, in essence
separating the DB.   Currently my tapes are collocated by node in the
tapepool (library) but the copypool (offsite) is not.  I know that for
the library I need to change ownership of the tapes to the new server(s)
but am not sure what happens with the copypool tapes.  I don't believe
that the different servers can track files on the same tape.  I have
read papers on using this method but have not found a reference on how
to handle the offsite tapes.  Can someone please point me in the right
direction?  Thanks.

Debbie Haberstroh
Server Administration
Northrop Grumman Information Technology 
Commercial, State & Local (CSL)
972-946-5639

Copypool Tape Ownership

[Haberstroh, Debbie (IT)]

Hi All,

We are going to be moving our current TSM DB to a new server and breaking it up 
into separate instances so that the databases will be smaller. Our plan is to 
restore the DB as in a DR and then remove the nodes and policy domains that 
will be on the 2nd instance, in essence separating the DB.   Currently my tapes 
are collocated by node in the tapepool (library) but the copypool (offsite) is 
not.  I know that for the library I need to change ownership of the tapes to 
the new server(s) but am not sure what happens with the copypool tapes.  I 
don't believe that the different servers can track files on the same tape.  I 
have read papers on using this method but have not found a reference on how to 
handle the offsite tapes.  Can someone please point me in the right direction?  
Thanks.

Debbie Haberstroh
Server Administration
Northrop Grumman Information Technology 
Commercial, State & Local (CSL)
972-946-5639

Re: Fw: TSM being abandoned?

[Curtis Preston]

To my knowledge, almost all (if not ALL) the VTLs/IDTs are just Linux
kernels running tape emulation and dedupe software inside a server.  So
I don't really see this as a software vs hardware debate, as it's really
all software. It's more along the lines of design goals and
single-mindedness.  VTL vendors knew they had to run at 100s or 1000s of
MB/s, so that's what they designed for -- and they had to bet big or go
home.  The backup software dedupe products, OTOH, were designed mainly
to back up remote offices, which has very different design goals.  In
addition, they had many other products to get right as well.

---
W. Curtis Preston
Backup Blog @ www.backupcentral.com
VP Data Protection, GlassHouse Technologies 

> -Original Message-
> From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of
> Nicholas Cassimatis
> Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 10:58 AM
> To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
> Subject: [ADSM-L] Fw: TSM being abandoned?
> 
> Compression and encryption are also much faster in hardware than
software
> -
> especially when the software is running on a processor doing other
work.
> Nothing new under the sun - it's just the same paradigm applied to a
new
> function.
> 
> Nick Cassimatis
> 
> - Forwarded by Nicholas Cassimatis/Raleigh/IBM on 04/17/2008 01:51
PM
> -
> 
> "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager"  wrote on 04/17/2008
> 12:13:08 PM:
> > Re: TSM being abandoned?
> >
> > Curtis Preston
> >
> > to:
> >
> > ADSM-L
> >
> > 04/17/2008 12:18 PM
> >
> > Sent by:
> >
> > "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" 
> >
> > Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager"
> >
> > Just to set realistic expectations... To date, no backup software
vendor
> > has offered dedupe that has anywhere near the speed that is offered
by
> > the VTL/IDT (intelligent disk target) market.  The backup software
> > dedupe products run at 10s of MB/s, MAYBE 100 MB/s, but that's it.
The
> > VTL/IDTs START at 300 MB/s and go up to 1000s MB/s.  I wish the best
for
> > IBM in this regard, as I am a big fan of dedupe, but history is not
in
> > their favor.  In addition, the other software companies that did
this
> > did so by acquisition.  It appears that IBM is going to do it
> > themselves.  That's much harder.
> >
> > That is, unless, the rumored acquisition of Diligent ever happens...
> >
> > ---
> > W. Curtis Preston
> > Backup Blog @ www.backupcentral.com
> > VP Data Protection, GlassHouse Technologies
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended
> solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are
addressed.
> If you have received this email in error please notify the system
manager.
> This message contains confidential information and is intended only
for
> the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should
not
> disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail.





This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended 
solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If 
you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This 
message contains confidential information and is intended only for the 
individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not 
disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail.

Re: Dodging a question in the admin client

[Richard Rhodes]

Use the -noc flag.

dsmadmc -id=
  -password=
  -noc  (no confirm - use on long running cmds)
  -quiet  (do not display std output messages)
  -outfile=   (write output to file)
  -tab  (tabular output is tab separated)
  -dataonly=y   (only write cmd output)
  -displ=[list|table] (tabular or list mode of output)






 "Lee, Gary D."
 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
 Sent by: "ADSM:To
 Dist Stor ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
 Manager"   cc
 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 .EDU> Subject
   Dodging a question in the admin
   client
 04/17/2008 01:40
 PM


 Please respond to
 "ADSM: Dist Stor
 Manager"
 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
   .EDU>






I have a shell script which does a query on the events table.
Suddenly, I now get the question
"this may take a while to computer, do you want to continue?"

Or something like that.

Is there a way to avoid this question when running batch scripts?
I am recently returned from surgery, and don't have all my resources here
at home.

Thanks for the help.



-
The information contained in this message is intended only for the
personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. If
the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an
agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you
are hereby notified that you have received this document in error
and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of
this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
communication in error, please notify us immediately, and delete
the original message.

LANFree Implementaion

[Abid Ilias]

I am trying to get LANFree work on one of our Windows 2003 machine, but
running into issues.  I have installed all the required software.  

 

Our scenario is as follows 

 

Library Manager - This is where the paths are defined from the storage
agent(node) to the Tape drives

 

Library Client - This is where the node is registered and the
dataread/datawrite is set to LANFree.  This node is in a domain where
the copy destination of backup copy group is pointing to a Tape Storage
pool.

 

Node - Windows 2003 machine (this is where the storage agent is running)
and TSM backup client software installed and configured for the Node.

 

 

 

When ever I kick off the backup, my paths for that storage agent go
offline with the following error code. This is part of the activity log
from the Library Client

 

 

04/17/08   12:14:15  ANR8963E (Session: 6166, Origin: LYMAN_STA)
Unable to

  find path to match the serial number defined
for drive

  DR5516 in library CAPEKLIB1 . (SESSION: 6166)

04/17/08   12:14:15  ANR0408I (Session: 6166, Origin: LYMAN_STA)
Session 27

  started for server NECLM (AIX-RS/6000)
(Tcp/Ip) for

  library sharing.  (SESSION: 6166)

04/17/08   12:14:15  ANR0409I (Session: 6166, Origin: LYMAN_STA)
Session 27

  ended for server NECLM (AIX-RS/6000).
(SESSION: 6166)

04/17/08   12:14:15  ANR8873E (Session: 6166, Origin: LYMAN_STA)
The path from

  source LYMAN_STA to destination DR5516
(mt7.0.0.2) is

  taken offline. (SESSION: 6166)

 

This is the log from the client. 

 

 

ANS1228E Sending of object
'\\lyman\d$\rm_mounts\healy\edrive\mount\sg1data\Program

Files\Microsoft\Exchange Server\Storage Group
1\CatalogData-17e0dbd1-58f0-4608-97ef-1e493e832a15-cd14e744-98a7-44b9-87
0f-f77675d52d8d\00010001.ci' failed ANS1312E Server media mount not
possible

 

ANS0350E The current client configuration does not comply with the value
of the DATAWRITEPATH or DATAREADPATH server option for this node

 

 

If would appreciate if someone can shed some light on it.

 

 

Thanks

Abid Ilias

TSM Administrator

773-702-0246

 

Fw: TSM being abandoned?

[Nicholas Cassimatis]

Compression and encryption are also much faster in hardware than software -
especially when the software is running on a processor doing other work.
Nothing new under the sun - it's just the same paradigm applied to a new
function.

Nick Cassimatis

- Forwarded by Nicholas Cassimatis/Raleigh/IBM on 04/17/2008 01:51 PM
-

"ADSM: Dist Stor Manager"  wrote on 04/17/2008
12:13:08 PM:
> Re: TSM being abandoned?
>
> Curtis Preston
>
> to:
>
> ADSM-L
>
> 04/17/2008 12:18 PM
>
> Sent by:
>
> "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" 
>
> Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager"
>
> Just to set realistic expectations... To date, no backup software vendor
> has offered dedupe that has anywhere near the speed that is offered by
> the VTL/IDT (intelligent disk target) market.  The backup software
> dedupe products run at 10s of MB/s, MAYBE 100 MB/s, but that's it.  The
> VTL/IDTs START at 300 MB/s and go up to 1000s MB/s.  I wish the best for
> IBM in this regard, as I am a big fan of dedupe, but history is not in
> their favor.  In addition, the other software companies that did this
> did so by acquisition.  It appears that IBM is going to do it
> themselves.  That's much harder.
>
> That is, unless, the rumored acquisition of Diligent ever happens...
>
> ---
> W. Curtis Preston
> Backup Blog @ www.backupcentral.com
> VP Data Protection, GlassHouse Technologies
>

Atape/atldd support - place a hdwr call

[Richard Rhodes]

This might seem really dumb/stupid, but I figured
I'd share it so someone else might doesn't make the same mistake.

We have 2 TSM dedicated library manager instances.  These
currently run on servers with other TSM instances.  We
are setting up new servers (tiny lpars) to provide dedicated
servers to run the dedicated library managers.  This is to allow
upgrading the library managers independently from
other tsm instances.

Since we have 3494 and 3584 libraries, I installed Atape
and atldd.  I did the work to setup access to the 3494
library:  edit ibmatl.conf, start lmcpd, create lmcp0,
then configure lmcp0 (change from Defined to Available).
his last step FAILED.

When I ran the configure for lmcp0, I received the following msg:

0514-519 The following device was not found in the customized
 device configuration database:
 name=' '

VERY STRANGE . . .(my new favorite saying this week).  Nothing
I did could get lmcp0 to become available.

This turned out to be a firewall problem.  Our storage equipment
(switches, arrays, libraries, etc) are behind a firewall and the
TSM servers are on the normal network.  Once the firewall was
configured correctly lmcp0 configured just fine.

BUT THAT'S NOT MY POINT . . .

Googling and searching IBM's web site returned no help for
the above message, so I opened a case with TSM SUPPORT.  This
was the first case I ever opened for Atape/atldd.  I received
back a reply that we DID NOT HAVE SUPPORT for Atape/atldd and
that I should fax them proof that we had this.  Now I'm really
confused!  I got our contracts person involved, who got the
local IBM people involved, which got an answer:  SUPPORT CALLS
FOR Atape/atldd should be placed AS HARDWARE CALLS ON THE 3494.
BUT, since we have not purchased Support Line (how-to question
support for Atape/atldd), I may not have received help anyway
since this could be interpreted as a "how to configure Atape/atldd"
question.

Lesson Learned:  For Atape/atldd problems, open a HARDWARE case
 for the library/drive.


Rick



-
The information contained in this message is intended only for the
personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. If
the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an
agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you
are hereby notified that you have received this document in error
and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of
this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
communication in error, please notify us immediately, and delete
the original message.

Dodging a question in the admin client

[Lee, Gary D.]

I have a shell script which does a query on the events table.
Suddenly, I now get the question
"this may take a while to computer, do you want to continue?"

Or something like that.

Is there a way to avoid this question when running batch scripts?
I am recently returned from surgery, and don't have all my resources here at 
home.

Thanks for the help.

Re: What to dedup.. was "TSM being abandoned?"

[Hans Christian Riksheim]

I am really not that familiar with dedupe products yet and I guess there's a 
lot of differences between them. At an Avamar presentation they claimed dedup 
ratio in the houndreds for file data especially Office files and such since the 
dedup algorithm was application sensitive. When I asked what to expect with 
Oracle, I did not get a definitive answer more like "It may or may not work". 
When marketing says this, my first thought is that Avamar/Oracle don't play 
well together.
 
Hans Chr.
 



Fra: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager på vegne av Henrik Vahlstedt
Sendt: to 17.04.2008 15:07
Til: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Emne: What to dedup.. was "TSM being abandoned?"




Hi,

Isnt dedup most beneficial at deduplicating databses ex. Oracle and
Domino etc...? No pre-compression or encryption.
Even Data Domain dedup thoose types av data pretty well.

But I tend to agree with your opinion about performance.

//Henrik


-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Hans Christian Riksheim
Sent: den 17 april 2008 14:32
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] TSM being abandoned?

We look at dedup VTL as a possible target for active storage pools
containing ordinary file backup. This way we don't risk very much if the
VTL breaks or the VTL's dedup index goes corrupt. I am a little
sceptical about the robustness of these products so I will not let these
VTL's play a too significant role in our setup. My sceptisism may of
course be totally unfounded.

For TDP-data which are written and read in large sequential chunks, tape
is just fine performance and cost wise. From what I have heard, it can
be hard to obtain any decent dedup compression for Oracle with dedup
VTLs and the performance is questionable.




Best regards

Hans Chr.



-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Orin Rehorst
Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 4:13 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: TSM being abandoned?

A VTL vendor said he is seeing a number of mid-sized businesses
migrating from TSM to NBU (Symantec). Do you think this is true? My
concern is that the pool of support techs will shrink and put us in a
bind.

Regards,
Orin

Orin Rehorst
Port of Houston
This email
originates from Steria AS, Biskop Gunnerus' gate 14a, N-0051 OSLO,
http://www.steria.no  . This email and any attachments 
may contain
confidential/intellectual property/copyright information and is only for
the use of the addressee(s). You are prohibited from copying,
forwarding, disclosing, saving or otherwise using it in any way if you
are not the addressee(s) or responsible for delivery. If you receive
this email by mistake, please advise the sender and cancel it
immediately. Steria may monitor the content of emails within its network
to ensure compliance with its policies and procedures. Any email is
susceptible to alteration and its integrity cannot be assured. Steria
shall not be liable if the message is altered, modified, falsified, or
even edited.


---
The information contained in this message may be CONFIDENTIAL and is
intended for the addressee only. Any unauthorised use, dissemination of the
information or copying of this message is prohibited. If you are not the
addressee, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and delete
this message.
Thank you.


This email 
originates from Steria AS, Biskop Gunnerus' gate 14a, N-0051 OSLO, 
http://www.steria.no. This email and any attachments may contain 
confidential/intellectual property/copyright information and is only for the 
use of the addressee(s). You are prohibited from copying, forwarding, 
disclosing, saving or otherwise using it in any way if you are not the 
addressee(s) or responsible for delivery. If you receive this email by mistake, 
please advise the sender and cancel it immediately. Steria may monitor the 
content of emails within its network to ensure compliance with its policies and 
procedures. Any email is susceptible to alteration and its integrity cannot be 
assured. Steria shall not be liable if the message is altered, modified, 
falsified, or even edited.

Re: What to dedup.. was "TSM being abandoned?"

[Richard Rhodes]

There is a presentation out on the web from the Oxford 2007 Symposium about
TSM dedup.  From reading it, I'm sure just how useful it will be.  It only
supports FILE devices (files are re-duplicated when written to tape) and
duplicate blocks are not removed until reclamation (you don't get the
benefit for a long time).  I also do not see an option for compression on
top of the dedup like a VTL or dedup appliance provides.

http://adsm-symposium.oucs.ox.ac.uk/2007/papers/Dave%20Cannon%20-%20Data%20Deduplication.pdf

Good reading!

Rick


-
The information contained in this message is intended only for the
personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. If
the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an
agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you
are hereby notified that you have received this document in error
and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of
this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
communication in error, please notify us immediately, and delete
the original message.

Re: What to dedup.. was "TSM being abandoned?"

[Curtis Preston]

That is where it is most beneficial in a TSM environment, but it will
also find redundant blocks of data between the different versions of
individual files that TSM is saving.

---
W. Curtis Preston
Backup Blog @ www.backupcentral.com
VP Data Protection, GlassHouse Technologies 

> -Original Message-
> From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of
> Henrik Vahlstedt
> Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 6:07 AM
> To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
> Subject: [ADSM-L] What to dedup.. was "TSM being abandoned?"
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Isnt dedup most beneficial at deduplicating databses ex. Oracle and
> Domino etc...? No pre-compression or encryption.
> Even Data Domain dedup thoose types av data pretty well.
> 
> But I tend to agree with your opinion about performance.
> 
> //Henrik
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of
> Hans Christian Riksheim
> Sent: den 17 april 2008 14:32
> To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
> Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] TSM being abandoned?
> 
> We look at dedup VTL as a possible target for active storage pools
> containing ordinary file backup. This way we don't risk very much if
the
> VTL breaks or the VTL's dedup index goes corrupt. I am a little
> sceptical about the robustness of these products so I will not let
these
> VTL's play a too significant role in our setup. My sceptisism may of
> course be totally unfounded.
> 
> For TDP-data which are written and read in large sequential chunks,
tape
> is just fine performance and cost wise. From what I have heard, it can
> be hard to obtain any decent dedup compression for Oracle with dedup
> VTLs and the performance is questionable.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Best regards
> 
> Hans Chr.
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of
> Orin Rehorst
> Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 4:13 PM
> To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
> Subject: TSM being abandoned?
> 
> A VTL vendor said he is seeing a number of mid-sized businesses
> migrating from TSM to NBU (Symantec). Do you think this is true? My
> concern is that the pool of support techs will shrink and put us in a
> bind.
> 
> Regards,
> Orin
> 
> Orin Rehorst
> Port of Houston
> This
email
> originates from Steria AS, Biskop Gunnerus' gate 14a, N-0051 OSLO,
> http://www.steria.no. This email and any attachments may contain
> confidential/intellectual property/copyright information and is only
for
> the use of the addressee(s). You are prohibited from copying,
> forwarding, disclosing, saving or otherwise using it in any way if you
> are not the addressee(s) or responsible for delivery. If you receive
> this email by mistake, please advise the sender and cancel it
> immediately. Steria may monitor the content of emails within its
network
> to ensure compliance with its policies and procedures. Any email is
> susceptible to alteration and its integrity cannot be assured. Steria
> shall not be liable if the message is altered, modified, falsified, or
> even edited.
> 
> 
> ---
> The information contained in this message may be CONFIDENTIAL and is
> intended for the addressee only. Any unauthorised use, dissemination
of
> the
> information or copying of this message is prohibited. If you are not
the
> addressee, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and
> delete
> this message.
> Thank you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended
> solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are
addressed.
> If you have received this email in error please notify the system
manager.
> This message contains confidential information and is intended only
for
> the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should
not
> disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail.





This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended 
solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If 
you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This 
message contains confidential information and is intended only for the 
individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not 
disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail.

Re: TSM being abandoned?

[Curtis Preston]

Just to set realistic expectations... To date, no backup software vendor
has offered dedupe that has anywhere near the speed that is offered by
the VTL/IDT (intelligent disk target) market.  The backup software
dedupe products run at 10s of MB/s, MAYBE 100 MB/s, but that's it.  The
VTL/IDTs START at 300 MB/s and go up to 1000s MB/s.  I wish the best for
IBM in this regard, as I am a big fan of dedupe, but history is not in
their favor.  In addition, the other software companies that did this
did so by acquisition.  It appears that IBM is going to do it
themselves.  That's much harder.

That is, unless, the rumored acquisition of Diligent ever happens...

---
W. Curtis Preston
Backup Blog @ www.backupcentral.com
VP Data Protection, GlassHouse Technologies 

> -Original Message-
> From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of
> Colwell, William F.
> Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 10:15 AM
> To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
> Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] TSM being abandoned?
> 
> I have been configuring a new TSM server since last November.  At
first
> I wanted a VTL.  But when I learned from the Oxford symposium
> presentations
> that TSM would have its own dedup in version 6,
> and considering the cost of the vtl, I ditched it and ordered a lot
more
> of SATA arrays for less money.
> 
> I think in a few years after v6 is widely installed, VTL's won't look
so
> good
> for TSM sites.  Assuming it all works of course.
> 
> your VTL vendor may just have been whistling past the graveyard.
> 
> Bill Colwell
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of
> Paul Zarnowski
> Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 12:08 PM
> To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
> Subject: Re: TSM being abandoned?
> 
> Deduplicating VTLs fit better into NBU sites.  TSM's progressive
> incremental methodology already reduces the data stream, making
deduping
> VTLs less of a "win", though it can still be beneficial.  My point is
> that
> VTL vendors may not look as positively on TSM as they do on other
> less-efficient backup solutions, because they don't sell as much VTL
> product to them.  IMHO.
> ..Paul
> 
> > A VTL vendor said he is seeing a number of mid-sized businesses
> > migrating from TSM to NBU (Symantec). Do you think this is true? My
> > concern is that the pool of support techs will shrink and put us in
a
> > bind.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Orin
> >
> > Orin Rehorst
> > Port of Houston
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended
> solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are
addressed.
> If you have received this email in error please notify the system
manager.
> This message contains confidential information and is intended only
for
> the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should
not
> disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail.





This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended 
solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If 
you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This 
message contains confidential information and is intended only for the 
individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not 
disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail.

Re: 5.5 server in larger environments?

[Remco Post]

Thank you all who responded.

--
Met vriendelijke groeten,

Remco Post, PLCS

Re: ANS1512E error on Windows 2000sp2 client baclient 5.2.4.0

[James Choate]

I looked in the dsmerror.log file, and the the answer was obvious...

Stuck out like a sore thumb. Thanks for your input

~james

04/15/2008 00:41:57 ANS1512E Scheduled event 'SQL_SERVER_SCHEDULE' failed.  
Return code = 12.
04/15/2008 00:41:57 Invalid option  'CHANGINGRETRIES 5' found in cloptset
04/15/2008 00:41:57 ANS1038S Invalid option specified
04/15/2008 06:41:59 Invalid option  'CHANGINGRETRIES 5' found in cloptset
04/15/2008 06:41:59 ANS1038S Invalid option specified
04/15/2008 09:35:31 Invalid option  'CHANGINGRETRIES 5' found in cloptset
04/15/2008 09:35:31 ANS1038S Invalid option specified
04/15/2008 09:35:34 Invalid option  'CHANGINGRETRIES 5' found in cloptset
04/15/2008 09:35:34 ANS1038S Invalid option specified
04/15/2008 12:41:59 Invalid option  'CHANGINGRETRIES 5' found in cloptset
04/15/2008 12:41:59 ANS1038S Invalid option specified
04/15/2008 14:03:46 Invalid option  'CHANGINGRETRIES 5' found in cloptset
04/15/2008 14:03:46 ANS1038S Invalid option specified
04/15/2008 20:03:46 Invalid option  'CHANGINGRETRIES 5' found in cloptset
04/15/2008 20:03:46 ANS1038S Invalid option specified
04/16/2008 00:17:46 Invalid option  'CHANGINGRETRIES 5' found in cloptset
04/16/2008 00:17:46 ANS1038S Invalid option specified
04/16/2008 00:20:19 ANS1512E Scheduled event 'SQL_SERVER_SCHEDULE' failed.  
Return code = 12.
04/16/2008 00:20:19 Invalid option  'CHANGINGRETRIES 5' found in cloptset
04/16/2008 00:20:19 ANS1038S Invalid option specified
04/16/2008 06:20:20 Invalid option  'CHANGINGRETRIES 5' found in cloptset
04/16/2008 06:20:20 ANS1038S Invalid option specified
04/16/2008 12:20:20 Invalid option  'CHANGINGRETRIES 5' found in cloptset
04/16/2008 12:20:20 ANS1038S Invalid option specified
04/16/2008 14:00:49 Invalid option  'CHANGINGRETRIES 5' found in cloptset
04/16/2008 14:00:49 ANS1038S Invalid option specified
04/16/2008 14:00:51 Invalid option  'CHANGINGRETRIES 5' found in cloptset
04/16/2008 14:00:51 ANS1038S Invalid option specified
04/16/2008 14:01:10 Invalid option  'CHANGINGRETRIES 5' found in cloptset
04/16/2008 14:01:10 ANS1038S Invalid option specified
04/16/2008 14:01:24 Operation stopped by user
04/16/2008 18:20:20 Invalid option  'CHANGINGRETRIES 5' found in cloptset
04/16/2008 18:20:20 ANS1038S Invalid option specified
04/17/2008 00:14:21 Invalid option  'CHANGINGRETRIES 5' found in cloptset
04/17/2008 00:14:21 ANS1038S Invalid option specified
04/17/2008 00:18:48 ANS1512E Scheduled event 'SQL_SERVER_SCHEDULE' failed.  
Return code = 12.
04/17/2008 00:18:48 Invalid option  'CHANGINGRETRIES 5' found in cloptset
04/17/2008 00:18:48 ANS1038S Invalid option specified
04/17/2008 06:18:48 Invalid option  'CHANGINGRETRIES 5' found in cloptset
04/17/2008 06:18:49 ANS1038S Invalid option specified

-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of 
Thorneycroft, Doug
Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 5:04 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: ANS1512E error on Windows 2000sp2 client baclient 5.2.4.0

anything in the dsmerror.log?
are you running Pre or post schedule commands?

-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of James Choate
Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 3:52 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: ANS1512E error on Windows 2000sp2 client baclient 5.2.4.0


I have a 5.4.3.0 TSM server running running on Windows 2003 server.

My client in Windows 2000 sp2 server with ba client 5.2.4.0

My schedule SQL_SERVER_SCHEDULE fails because I get an ANS1512E error in my 
dsmsched.log file.

However when I review the log file, it appears that everything was successful.

Any ideas on how to fix this?


Snippet of the dsmsched.log file from client:


04/15/2008 00:39:28 Node Name: SRVICE
04/15/2008 00:39:28 Session established with server SRVTSMBACK1: Windows
04/15/2008 00:39:28   Server Version 5, Release 4, Level 3.0
04/15/2008 00:39:28   Server date/time: 04/15/2008 00:39:28  Last access: 
04/14/2008 18:40:27

04/15/2008 00:39:28 --- SCHEDULEREC OBJECT BEGIN SQL_SERVER_SCHEDULE 04/15/2008 
00:10:00
04/15/2008 00:39:28 Incremental backup of volume '\\srvice\c$'
04/15/2008 00:39:28 Incremental backup of volume '\\srvice\d$'
04/15/2008 00:39:28 Incremental backup of volume 'SYSTEMOBJECT'
04/15/2008 00:39:28 Backup System Object: 'COM+ Database'.

04/15/2008 00:39:28 Backup System Object: 'Event Log'.

04/15/2008 00:39:28 Backup System Object: 'System and Boot Files'.

04/15/2008 00:39:28 Backup System Object: 'Registry'.

04/15/2008 00:39:28 Backup System Object: 'RSM Database'.

04/15/2008 00:39:28 Backup System Object: 'WMI Database'.

04/15/2008 00:39:31 ANS1898I * Processed   500 files *
04/15/2008 00:39:32 ANS1898I * Processed 1,000 files *
04/15/2008 00:39:33 ANS1898I * Processed 2,000 files *
04/15/2008 00:39:34 ANS1898I * Processed 3,000 files *
04/15/2008 00:39:35 ANS1898I * Processed 3,500 files *
04/15/2008 00:39:36 ANS

Re: TSM being abandoned?

[Curtis Preston]

> Deduplicating VTLs fit better into NBU sites.  TSM's progressive
> incremental methodology already reduces the data stream, making
deduping
> VTLs less of a "win", though it can still be beneficial.  

As I've said before, TSM's progressive incremental does tend to reduce
the total dedupe ratio by about 50% (from an average of 20:1 to 10:1).
There is still plenty of duplicate data between the multiple versions of
each file you're saving in TSM, and TDP backups stil do fulls and
incrementals.

> My point is that
> VTL vendors may not look as positively on TSM as they do on other
> less-efficient backup solutions, because they don't sell as much VTL
> product to them.  IMHO.

This is DEFINITELY not the case, as most VTL vendors that I've talked to
are selling a disproportionate amount of VTLs on TSM.  In fact, I'm
seeing more customers than I thought I would abandoning their disk pool
and going straight to VTL.  

When we start talking dedupe, though, the numbers do go way down,
though.  There's no doubt it brings a benefit to the TSM customer, but
the pricing is such that some TSM customers feel they're being
overcharged.  If dedupe makes my 1 TB array look like a 10 TB array
(10:1 dedupe, common with TSM), and you want to charge me a 10x multiple
for it, what's the point in that?  (I'm not saying that's how the
vendors are pricing it.  I'm just giving an example of the type of
pricing that might turn off a TSM customer.)

---
W. Curtis Preston
Backup Blog @ www.backupcentral.com
VP Data Protection, GlassHouse Technologies 





This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended 
solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If 
you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This 
message contains confidential information and is intended only for the 
individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not 
disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail.

Re: TSM being abandoned?

[Curtis Preston]

I agree with Howard.  People move back and forth all the time.  As an
independent consultant with interaction with a lot of different
products, we haven't seen a mass migration one way or another.

---
W. Curtis Preston
Backup Blog @ www.backupcentral.com
VP Data Protection, GlassHouse Technologies 

> -Original Message-
> From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of
> Howard Coles
> Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 7:19 AM
> To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
> Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] TSM being abandoned?
> 
> I'd say businesses are migrating in all kinds of directions.  I'd
think
> that you'd see some migrating from other products to TSM as well,
> however, it would be interesting to see current numbers.
> 
> See Ya'
> Howard
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf
> > Of Orin Rehorst
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 9:13 AM
> > To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
> > Subject: [ADSM-L] TSM being abandoned?
> >
> > A VTL vendor said he is seeing a number of mid-sized businesses
> > migrating from TSM to NBU (Symantec). Do you think this is true? My
> > concern is that the pool of support techs will shrink and put us in
a
> > bind.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Orin
> >
> > Orin Rehorst
> > Port of Houston
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended
> solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are
addressed.
> If you have received this email in error please notify the system
manager.
> This message contains confidential information and is intended only
for
> the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should
not
> disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail.





This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended 
solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If 
you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This 
message contains confidential information and is intended only for the 
individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not 
disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail.

Re: Cleaning up Windows registry entries

[Kinder, Kevin P]

Zoltan,

I've encountered this issue in the past, and the document below has
always solved it.

http://www-1.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg21141048

 

Kevin Kinder
State of West Virginia

-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Zoltan Forray/AC/VCU
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 10:55 AM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: [ADSM-L] Cleaning up Windows registry entries

We are having fits trying to reinstall the client on a 2K3 server.
Originally, the client was installed to "D:" drive.  They tried to
reinstall a newer client to the "C:" drive.

Now it constantly complains about the "help" file.

Tried a complete uninstall - deleted directories - reinstall. Same
problem.

Is there some tool to completely rip the client out by its short-hairs
and
leave no traces, behind?

Cleaning up Windows registry entries

[Zoltan Forray/AC/VCU]

We are having fits trying to reinstall the client on a 2K3 server.
Originally, the client was installed to "D:" drive.  They tried to
reinstall a newer client to the "C:" drive.

Now it constantly complains about the "help" file.

Tried a complete uninstall - deleted directories - reinstall. Same
problem.

Is there some tool to completely rip the client out by its short-hairs and
leave no traces, behind?

Recovery issue

[Jim Young]

Hi,

Can someone please point me in the right direction.  I've got an AIX 5.3 OS
with a vanilla install of TSM5.3.2.0. and I'm looking to do a test upgrade
by recovering the live 5.3.2.0 Database to this server and then upgrade.  Or
i was trying to.

Right, I've dsmfmt'd the DB & Log *.dsm files as per the DRMplan
But when it comes to using the dsmserv command for the format or restore,
its bombing out. The only pointers i can find relate to setting DSMSERV_DIR
to the install path, which is true already.

[EMAIL PROTECTED] /usr/bin/dsmserv restore db devc=FILEDUMP
vol=/tsmtemp/07838143.dbb
ANR7800I DSMSERV generated at 06:14:03 on Sep 27 2005.

Tivoli Storage Manager for AIX-RS/6000

Version 5, Release 3, Level 2.0

Licensed Materials - Property of IBM

(C) Copyright IBM Corporation 1990, 2004.

All rights reserved.

U.S. Government Users Restricted Rights - Use, duplication or disclosure

restricted by GSA ADP Schedule Contract with IBM Corporation.

ANR0900I Processing options file dsmserv.opt.

ANR0109E Attempt number 1 Unable to load cryptography module from
'/usr/tivoli

/tsm/server/bin/.'.

ANR0109E Attempt number 2 Unable to load cryptography module from
'/usr/tivoli

/tsm/server/bin/.'.



Cheers



Jim (lost...on an island...somewhere)


Cattles plc Registered in England No: 543610
Kingston House, Centre 27 Business Park,
Woodhead Road, Birstall, Batley, WF179TD.

The views and opinions expressed herein are those of the author and not of 
Cattles plc or any of its subsidiaries.The content of this e-mail is 
confidential, may contain privileged material and is intended solely for the 
recipient(s) named above.

If you receive this in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete 
this e-mail.

Please note that neither Cattles plc nor the sender accepts any responsibility 
for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan the email and attachments(if 
any). No contracts or agreements may be concluded on behalf of Cattles plc or 
its subsidiaries by means of email communications.

This message has been scanned for Viruses
by Cattles and Sophos Puremessage scanning service.

Re: Expiration Query

[Thomas Denier]

-Jeff White wrote: -

>I have a query regarding expiration
>
>Recently implemented new retention policies new reduce the amount of
>version of windows files we have in TSM storage. Before implementing,
>i ran this script to get the total number of files in storage at that
>time:
>
>SELECT SUM(NUM_FILES), NODE_NAME FROM OCCUPANCY GROUP BY NODE_NAME
>order >by 1 desc
>
>This told me i had 125,171,962 files in storage
>
>I run expiry every day, capture and record from the activity log the
>number of backup objects deleted every day. Over the first 10 days,
>this totalled 6,652,218 files.
>
>I then re-ran the above script and the total number of files was
>113,796,651, a difference of 11,375,311.
>
>Was i wrong to expect number of expired files to match the actual
>difference?

Are you using copy storage pools? If so, expiring one object will
typically reduce the sum of the occupancy counts by two, because
both the count for the relevant primary storage pool and the
count for the associated copy storage pool will decrease.

Note that there are some objects that TSM can recreate from data in
the TSM database without needing to put anything in storage pools.
Zero length files, Unix directories, and Unix special files can
usually be handled this way. Expiring such objects will have no
effect on the occupancy counts.

What to dedup.. was "TSM being abandoned?"

[Henrik Vahlstedt]

 
Hi,

Isnt dedup most beneficial at deduplicating databses ex. Oracle and
Domino etc...? No pre-compression or encryption.
Even Data Domain dedup thoose types av data pretty well.

But I tend to agree with your opinion about performance.

//Henrik


-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Hans Christian Riksheim
Sent: den 17 april 2008 14:32
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] TSM being abandoned?

We look at dedup VTL as a possible target for active storage pools
containing ordinary file backup. This way we don't risk very much if the
VTL breaks or the VTL's dedup index goes corrupt. I am a little
sceptical about the robustness of these products so I will not let these
VTL's play a too significant role in our setup. My sceptisism may of
course be totally unfounded.

For TDP-data which are written and read in large sequential chunks, tape
is just fine performance and cost wise. From what I have heard, it can
be hard to obtain any decent dedup compression for Oracle with dedup
VTLs and the performance is questionable.




Best regards

Hans Chr.

 

-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Orin Rehorst
Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 4:13 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: TSM being abandoned?

A VTL vendor said he is seeing a number of mid-sized businesses
migrating from TSM to NBU (Symantec). Do you think this is true? My
concern is that the pool of support techs will shrink and put us in a
bind.

Regards,
Orin

Orin Rehorst
Port of Houston
This email
originates from Steria AS, Biskop Gunnerus' gate 14a, N-0051 OSLO,
http://www.steria.no. This email and any attachments may contain
confidential/intellectual property/copyright information and is only for
the use of the addressee(s). You are prohibited from copying,
forwarding, disclosing, saving or otherwise using it in any way if you
are not the addressee(s) or responsible for delivery. If you receive
this email by mistake, please advise the sender and cancel it
immediately. Steria may monitor the content of emails within its network
to ensure compliance with its policies and procedures. Any email is
susceptible to alteration and its integrity cannot be assured. Steria
shall not be liable if the message is altered, modified, falsified, or
even edited.


---
The information contained in this message may be CONFIDENTIAL and is
intended for the addressee only. Any unauthorised use, dissemination of the
information or copying of this message is prohibited. If you are not the
addressee, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and delete
this message.
Thank you.

Re: TSM being abandoned?

[Hans Christian Riksheim]

We look at dedup VTL as a possible target for active storage pools
containing ordinary file backup. This way we don't risk very much if the
VTL breaks or the VTL's dedup index goes corrupt. I am a little
sceptical about the robustness of these products so I will not let these
VTL's play a too significant role in our setup. My sceptisism may of
course be totally unfounded.

For TDP-data which are written and read in large sequential chunks, tape
is just fine performance and cost wise. From what I have heard, it can
be hard to obtain any decent dedup compression for Oracle with dedup
VTLs and the performance is questionable.




Best regards

Hans Chr.

 

-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Orin Rehorst
Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 4:13 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: TSM being abandoned?

A VTL vendor said he is seeing a number of mid-sized businesses
migrating from TSM to NBU (Symantec). Do you think this is true? My
concern is that the pool of support techs will shrink and put us in a
bind.

Regards,
Orin

Orin Rehorst
Port of Houston
This email 
originates from Steria AS, Biskop Gunnerus' gate 14a, N-0051 OSLO, 
http://www.steria.no. This email and any attachments may contain 
confidential/intellectual property/copyright information and is only for the 
use of the addressee(s). You are prohibited from copying, forwarding, 
disclosing, saving or otherwise using it in any way if you are not the 
addressee(s) or responsible for delivery. If you receive this email by mistake, 
please advise the sender and cancel it immediately. Steria may monitor the 
content of emails within its network to ensure compliance with its policies and 
procedures. Any email is susceptible to alteration and its integrity cannot be 
assured. Steria shall not be liable if the message is altered, modified, 
falsified, or even edited.

Re: Expiration Query

[Leandro Mazur]

I think the both numbers should match, if didn't backuped anything at all
after ran the first command...

On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 5:59 AM, Jeff White <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

> Hi
>
>
>
> TSM v5.4.0
>
>
>
> I have a query regarding expiration
>
>
>
> Recently implemented new retention policies new reduce the amount of
> version of windows files we have in TSM storage. Before implementing, i
> ran this script to get the total number of files in storage at that
> time:
>
>
>
> SELECT SUM(NUM_FILES), NODE_NAME FROM OCCUPANCY GROUP BY NODE_NAME order
> by 1 desc
>
>
>
> This told me i had 125,171,962 files in storage
>
>
>
> I run expiry every day, capture and record from the activity log the
> number of backup objects deleted every day. Over the first 10 days, this
> totalled 6,652,218 files.
>
>
>
> I then re-ran the above script and the total number of files was
> 113,796,651, a difference of 11,375,311.
>
>
>
> Was i wrong to expect number of expired files to match the actual
> difference?
>
>
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
> Jeff
>
>
> 
> Woolworths plc
> Registered Office: 242 Marylebone Road, London NW1 6JL
> Registered in England, Number 104206
>
> This e-mail is only intended for the person(s) to whom it is addressed and
> may contain confidential information.  Unless stated to the contrary, any
> opinions or comments are personal to the writer and do not represent the
> official view of the company.  If you have received this e-mail in error,
> please notify us immediately by reply e-mail and then delete this message
> from your system Please do not copy it or use it for any purposes,  or
> disclose its contents to any other person.  Thank you for your
> co-operation.
>
> 
>
> 
> Email scanned for viruses and unwanted content by emailsystems
>
> Information regarding this service can be found at www.emailsystems.com




--
__
Leandro Mazur

Expiration Query

[Jeff White]

Hi

 

TSM v5.4.0

 

I have a query regarding expiration

 

Recently implemented new retention policies new reduce the amount of
version of windows files we have in TSM storage. Before implementing, i
ran this script to get the total number of files in storage at that
time:

 

SELECT SUM(NUM_FILES), NODE_NAME FROM OCCUPANCY GROUP BY NODE_NAME order
by 1 desc

 

This told me i had 125,171,962 files in storage

 

I run expiry every day, capture and record from the activity log the
number of backup objects deleted every day. Over the first 10 days, this
totalled 6,652,218 files.

 

I then re-ran the above script and the total number of files was
113,796,651, a difference of 11,375,311. 

 

Was i wrong to expect number of expired files to match the actual
difference? 

 

 

Thanks

 

Jeff


Woolworths plc
Registered Office: 242 Marylebone Road, London NW1 6JL 
Registered in England, Number 104206

This e-mail is only intended for the person(s) to whom it is addressed and 
may contain confidential information.  Unless stated to the contrary, any 
opinions or comments are personal to the writer and do not represent the 
official view of the company.  If you have received this e-mail in error, 
please notify us immediately by reply e-mail and then delete this message 
from your system Please do not copy it or use it for any purposes,  or 
disclose its contents to any other person.  Thank you for your co-operation.


Email scanned for viruses and unwanted content by emailsystems

Information regarding this service can be found at www.emailsystems.com