I am waiting for the vendor to provide a reference for an eVault customer using Universe. If they do not have one then we will need to setup some testing of the restore. Since we have both a production and test account. We will run the backup for 8 days and then on the ninth restore to our test account and we should see all of the transactions from the prior day. Our test account was last copied from our production account in August of 2004.
> -----Original Message----- > From: Scott Richardson [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, November 28, 2005 10:05 AM > To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org > Subject: Re: [U2] [UV] LiveVault backup software > > Correction: > How did GarryS's compnays evalution go? > > Dianne, how did your client's situation resolve? > > Thanks. > Scott > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Scott Richardson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org> > Sent: Monday, November 28, 2005 11:53 AM > Subject: Re: [U2] [UV] LiveVault backup software > > > > Hello Diane, > > I am interested to hear how your company's evaluation of "eVault's" AIX > > back up solutions on AIX went? Were they able to handle your UV > > database? > > > > Does anyone else use this type of backup solution? > > > > Thanks! > > Scott > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Dianne Ackerman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org> > > Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2005 2:46 PM > > Subject: Re: [U2] [UV] LiveVault backup software > > > > > > > Thanks Allen for this description, it is very helpful! > > > -Dianne > > > > > > Allen Egerton wrote: > > > > > > >From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>We are looking at a company "eVault" but I have concerns about their > AIX > > > >>agent that does incremental backups. And how UV on AIX writes to > disk. > > Is > > > >>HASH.AID/HASH.HELP a UV tool or an AIX tool? Does UV have its own > file > > > >>system compared to AIX? > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > >In reverse order, as it were. AIX is the operating system, and thus > is > > the > > > >owner/operator of the file systems. UV is a *very* large application > > > >running on top of AIX, or SunOS, or HPUnix, or Windows, etc, etc. > Thus > > UV > > > >has to live within the boundaries established by the operating > system. > > > > > > > >That having been said, understand that within those boundaries, UV > has > > its > > > >own rules including the structure of the data files. To Unix, files > are > > > >just strings of bytes, the organization is imposed by the > application. > > So, > > > >the files are readable and writable by Unix operations, but they're > > > >typically not understood by those operations. Much as a MS-Word > document > > > >looks like gibberish if you open it with notepad, (or any other text > > > >editor), UV data files will look like gibberish to most unix > utilities. > > > > > > > >Which can make it extremely dangerous to work with tools that aren't > > > >cognizant of the UV structure, except where the structure is not > specific > > to > > > >UV. Program files for example are typically type 1 or 19, which are > > simply > > > >sub-directories containing flat files. Those flat files can be > edited > > using > > > >vi, or emacs, or anything else you'd like without damaging the data > > because > > > >the data layout isn't specific to UV. > > > > > > > >HashAid/HashHellp are UV tools, which run under *nix, they > "understand" > > the > > > >file structures particular to UV, and thus can traverse them, analyze > > them, > > > >and report on them. > > > > > > > >UV writes by at a very low level instructing *nix to write. But it's > > > >critical to understand that UV has determined the actual location > within > > the > > > >data stream to perform the write. > > > > > > > >Backup strategies typically fall into two methodologies. Either you > > freeze > > > >the data and copy it, or you use UV tools which pay attention to > > > >record/group locks so as to get a clean backup. Classic mistake is > to > > have > > > >your users modifying the data while you back it up with a non-UV > product. > > > >When you restore the file(s), they're potentially corrupted because > their > > > >internally inconsistent. > > > > > > > >I can't speak about "eVault" other than to say that it *appears* that > > their > > > >incremental backup would back up every file that's been modified. > So, > > your > > > >CUST.MAST file which gets hit every day would be included in your > > > >incremental backup in its entirety, while your MONTH.END file would > get > > > >picked up after it was modified at the end of the month, and > presumably > > only > > > >until you ran a "full" backup. But this is guesswork on my part > based > > upon > > > >little information. > > > >------- > > > ------- > > > u2-users mailing list > > > u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org > > > To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ > > ------- > > u2-users mailing list > > u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org > > To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ > ------- > u2-users mailing list > u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org > To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ ------- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
