L PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, February 20, 2004 10:47 AM
> To: U2 Users Discussion List
> Subject: RE: UniVerse and Backup Exec
>
>
>
>
> Excellent write up Tom. This is a keeper email.
>
> Thanks,
>
> -Doug
>
>
> Yes, Tom. The Windows SharedSec
Excellent write up Tom. This is a keeper email.
Thanks,
-Doug
Yes, Tom. The Windows SharedSection registry tweak write-up was great.
I apologize for neglecting to acknowledge it sooner!
Thank you,
Gwen Buck
--
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo
At 11:34 AM 2/19/2004, Tom Firl wrote:
I didn't catch the nature of the errors, but the registry tweak may have
to do with the Windows SharedSection parameter that relates to telnet
service.
Excellent write up Tom. This is a keeper email.
Thanks,
-Doug
--
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECT
age-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Behalf Of Tom Firl
> Sent: Friday, 20 February 2004 6:34 a.m.
> To: U2 Users Discussion List
> Subject: RE: UniVerse and Backup Exec
>
[snip]
> Note, on a system-wide basis there is a finite limit of 48MB
> of
> Dennis also mentioned a registry tweak. I'm guessing that
> possibly this is contained in the tech tip that Steve posted.
I didn't catch the nature of the errors, but the registry tweak may have to do with
the Windows SharedSection parameter that relates to telnet service.
Users that conn
Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Dennis Bartlett
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2004 9:29 AM
To: 'U2 Users Discussion List'
Subject: RE: UniVerse and Backup Exec
Hi Gwen
We're running UniVerse 10.0.4 (a known baddie as it is) and
Backup Exec,
tho
First of all, thanks to all who have replied to my post! I'm attempting
to combine all replies in this one e-mail.
A couple people mentioned alternate backup methods. One was to do a
uvbackup and run Backup Exec and the other was to backup remotely.
Since IBM does not want Backup Exec to exist
ms as running native nix. I'm not saying this definitely IS
such an instance, but it could well be ...
Cheers,
Wol
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Dennis Bartlett
Sent: 19 February 2004 14:29
To: 'U2 Users Discussion List'
Subjec
Subject: UniVerse and Backup Exec
Gwen,
We found the following Techtip (#1299) from Epicor to help with Backup Exec
and Universe.
It has to do with a registry setting to allow Universe and Backup Exec
to play nice on a Windows NT server, the same setting might work for a
Windows 2000
Server.
> We're running UniVerse 10.0.4 (a known baddie as it is) and
> Backup Exec, tho' which I don't know off hand. We also get plenty app
> errors
Sorry, I missed the original post...but for what it's worth - we also run
UV10.0.4 on W2k and use Backup Exec with no problems. Only comment is you
should i
Hi Gwen
We're running UniVerse 10.0.4 (a known baddie as it is) and
Backup Exec,
tho' which I don't know off hand. We also get plenty app
errors
We've had 47 system crashes sinces Aug '03, which IBM have
first blamed
on Backup Exec, then told us "that 10.1 would fix it"
thereby admitting
the prob
Dear Gwen Buck et al
I am running UV 9.6.2.8 on a WinNT 4.0 SP 6.0a box using Veritas Backup
Exec. I do not know which release of Veritas that I am using.
I haven't had any problems. I'd press your VAR for more detail. One
possible solution would be to run a uvbackup and allow Veritas to bac
12 matches
Mail list logo
