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
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
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
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
-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
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
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
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
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
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
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
Thank you all who responded.
--
Met vriendelijke groeten,
Remco Post, PLCS
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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 -
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
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
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 Primary Pools New
Copypool Name.
I would suggest assigning the current copypool to the instance which
owns the
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
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
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
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
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
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
29 matches
Mail list logo
