Re: TSM database maximum recommended size

2002-04-13 Thread Seay, Paul
Based on some comments I heard recently, nothing has been done to DB backup performance since ADSM V2. -Original Message- From: Darrel Gleddie [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, April 12, 2002 9:02 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: TSM database maximum recommended size

Re: TSM V5.1 - new return codes

2002-04-13 Thread Andrew Raibeck
Hi Tim, Yes, your testing is correct. Since the file excluded message (ANS1115W) is issued for selective and archive, you will get the rc 4; and since ANS1115W is not issued for incremental backup, the rc will be 0 (barring any other problems). Historically TSM has always worked this way, with

Re: TSM V5.1 - RC=4

2002-04-13 Thread Zlatko Krastev
Hello all, my question is mainly targeted to Andy Raibeck but all opinions are welcome. This behavior was first implemeted at v4.2.1.0 client. The discussion at that time finished with opinion this was a bug and later behavior restored to normal. Now RC=4 is getting back but as a feature and is

New Tivoli licensing - what processor mean

2002-04-13 Thread Zlatko Krastev
Hello *SMers, I still need to obtain an answer what is hidden behind the new processor term in Tivoli licensing scheme. It is not only in ISM but also in Monitoring, Configuration Manager, etc. After long reading of all announcement letters issued by IBM on 9.04 I still got not answer. The

Re: Compression

2002-04-13 Thread Zlatko Krastev
It depends. If your nodes are not processor constrained - use compression. If network is faster than nodes can pipe through - do not compress. If you cannot afford big disk pools, do not have SAN, etc. - compression might help. So you have to decide. Some nodes might use it some other might not.

Re: New Tivoli licensing - what processor mean

2002-04-13 Thread Adolph Kahan
Processor means the number of CPUs. For example if you have an RS6000 with 4 CPUs, that is 4 processors. The new pricing is based on the number of CPUs/processors in the machine. -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Zlatko Krastev Sent:

Re: TSM V5.1 - RC=4

2002-04-13 Thread Andrew Raibeck
my question is mainly targeted to Andy Raibeck but all opinions are welcome. This behavior was first implemeted at v4.2.1.0 client. The discussion at that time finished with opinion this was a bug and later behavior restored to normal. Now RC=4 is getting back but as a feature and is documented.

Re: How do I know what tape/s my data is on?

2002-04-13 Thread Zlatko Krastev
Roy, what additional level of protection do you achieve sending *primary* (!!!) pool tapes off-site? Juraj is absolutely correct - this is very bad practice. Copy pool tapes can be ejected from library right after their creation or even made on a manual library consisting of standalone drive(s).

Version Compatibility and long-term archiving (was Re: No drives available - UPDATE)

2002-04-13 Thread Zlatko Krastev
--- I think TIVOLI doesn't understand IBM's religious belief in upward compatibility and so TSM 4 doesn't have a bridge from ADSM/TSM 3. More than that now we have v5.1 which would support compatibility only with v4.2.x. And v4.1 would be out of support very soon. There were already many threads

Re: It wouldn't have happened if they'd used TSM, would it?

2002-04-13 Thread Zlatko Krastev
The only fact might not be true is big defense contractor working on a cutting-edge project. OTOH it also may be true as well. I cannot recall where I looked at a survey which pointed that over 50% of small medium enterprises in Germany perform backups rarely than monthly or do not make any

Re: TSM Server 4.2.1.9 on Sun Solaris 8 and more

2002-04-13 Thread Zlatko Krastev
Why do you need to cache disk pool volumes ?? Are you going to restore just in the middle of backup. Or migrate to tape during backup. I prefer to create disk pool volumes to raw devices and let TSM spread the load. And it does this pretty well. Zlatko Krastev IT Consultant Please respond to

Re: Version Compatibility and long-term archiving (was Re: No drives available - UPDATE)

2002-04-13 Thread Zlatko Krastev
Ooops, Solaris 2.6 is not in the list. It IS supported. Sorry Zlatko Krastev IT Consultant

Re: TSM V5.1 - RC=4

2002-04-13 Thread Zlatko Krastev
Andy, I do not want to say this was intentional. What I am mostly interested is which parts of v4.2.1.0 discussions are applicable for v5.1 client. If we look at the client as a black-box (and in fact customer does not need to know why and what drives the client to perform this way) we are

Re: New Tivoli licensing - what processor mean

2002-04-13 Thread Adolph Kahan
The per processor charge does not apply to the client. It only applies to the server. The thing to remember with 5.1, is that there are two different versions of the server and client. The Base version and the Enterprise Version. The Enterprise Edition server has a higher per processor price than

Backup DB using specific tape range

2002-04-13 Thread Steve Schaub
When my daily database backup runs, it sometimes calls for a tape that has not come back from offsite yet. This is the command I am using (we want to use the smaller J tapes instead of K): BACKUP DB Devclass=3590 Type=full