Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Thoughts\s+on\s+Monthly\s+Archives\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Thoughts\s+on\s+Monthly\s+Archives\s*$/: 26 ]

Total 26 documents matching your query.

1. Thoughts on Monthly Archives (score: 1): Author: Mike Bantz <mbantz AT RSINC DOT COM>; Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 15:00:40 -0600; We are implementing the following: Monthly FULL backups, saved for 4 years for document retention purposes. Backupsets are not viable, as a restore would be a pain. So it looks like we're going to do; /lists/html/ADSM-L/2004-07/msg00425.html (9,816 bytes)
2. Re: Thoughts on Monthly Archives (score: 1): Author: Dwight Cook <cookde AT US.IBM DOT COM>; Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 16:42:33 -0500; one thought... for clients that require the monthly 4 year archives... register alternate nodes by the name of <nodename>_exp push any data required for long term retention (in the form of either bac; /lists/html/ADSM-L/2004-07/msg00426.html (12,613 bytes)
3. Re: Thoughts on Monthly Archives (score: 1): Author: Mike Bantz <mbantz AT RSINC DOT COM>; Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 16:43:31 -0600; environment that has a retention value of more than 370 days Can I ask why? This seems like an **awfully** short time... - mike; /lists/html/ADSM-L/2004-07/msg00427.html (9,615 bytes)
4. Re: Thoughts on Monthly Archives (score: 1): Author: Dwight Cook <cookde AT US.IBM DOT COM>; Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 19:22:33 -0500; Sure... started a long time ago when directories were bound to the longest retention management class that existed... with a 10 year archive management class defined, I was keeping a lot of stuff WAY; /lists/html/ADSM-L/2004-07/msg00428.html (12,800 bytes)
5. Re: Thoughts on Monthly Archives (score: 1): Author: Gordon Woodward <gordon.woodward AT DB DOT COM>; Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 11:22:20 +1000; We use to do full Monthly archives of all our important data on our servers but our TSM database was growing too rapidly, especially when we have to retain our backups for 7 years. What we ended up d; /lists/html/ADSM-L/2004-07/msg00433.html (11,704 bytes)
6. Re: Thoughts on Monthly Archives (score: 1): Author: Steve Harris <Steve_Harris AT HEALTH.QLD.GOV DOT AU>; Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 11:53:05 +1000; Gordon, I've though of doing this in the past, but, if we postulate a random daily change rate, then the chances of a particular file being changed in any one month are at 1% , 1-(0.99**30), or about; /lists/html/ADSM-L/2004-07/msg00434.html (13,576 bytes)
7. Re: Thoughts on Monthly Archives (score: 1): Author: Mike Bantz <mbantz AT RSINC DOT COM>; Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 08:40:21 -0600; How would I find that out? We're not even doing monthly backups yet - just trying to see the impending impact. Much much more database usage (Obviously) much more tape usage I guess I'm just trying t; /lists/html/ADSM-L/2004-07/msg00444.html (14,589 bytes)
8. Re: Thoughts on Monthly Archives (score: 1): Author: Tammy Schellenberg <TSchellenberg AT PROSPERACREDITUNION DOT CA>; Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 08:26:47 -0700; Mike you don't have to move your database to enlarge it. if you add disk space you can create new volumes and then you just extend the database over these new volumes to gain the extra space that you; /lists/html/ADSM-L/2004-07/msg00446.html (17,057 bytes)
9. Re: Thoughts on Monthly Archives (score: 1): Author: asr AT UFL DOT EDU; Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 12:07:39 -0400; I think your math is good; I'd add though that there's a -GREAT- deal of locality of reference: Or in other words, if 3% of your files change a day, then for user filespace probably 95% of the files; /lists/html/ADSM-L/2004-07/msg00448.html (11,648 bytes)
10. Re: Thoughts on Monthly Archives (score: 1): Author: asr AT UFL DOT EDU; Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 12:16:16 -0400; Count your incremental size over a series of days, and you'll have a measure of the instantaneous change rate. Count the number of different copies of various files in your backups table (BIG LONG EX; /lists/html/ADSM-L/2004-07/msg00449.html (11,952 bytes)
11. Re: Thoughts on Monthly Archives (score: 1): Author: Mike Bantz <mbantz AT RSINC DOT COM>; Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 10:46:48 -0600; In talking with a whole ton of people about this, this is the tentative idea: This is for document retention, so the recovery of a whole server isn't a requirement. If I can get back a MSSQL database; /lists/html/ADSM-L/2004-07/msg00450.html (13,327 bytes)
12. Re: Thoughts on Monthly Archives (score: 1): Author: "Stapleton, Mark" <mark.stapleton AT BERBEE DOT COM>; Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 12:55:58 -0500; Would that more admins put as much work into planning! Long-term file preservation can be difficult to plan. The best approach is to go to the customer and ask what the bottom line is--what is it exa; /lists/html/ADSM-L/2004-07/msg00453.html (11,355 bytes)
13. Re: Thoughts on Monthly Archives (score: 1): Author: Robert Clark <raclark AT REGENCE DOT COM>; Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 11:46:53 -0700; If you keep the tapes "outside the system", what do you do when there is an opportunity to change tape technology in 5 years? How do you migrate that data to new tapes? [RC] "Dwight Cook" <cookde AT; /lists/html/ADSM-L/2004-07/msg00454.html (14,854 bytes)
14. Re: Thoughts on Monthly Archives (score: 1): Author: Mike Bantz <mbantz AT RSINC DOT COM>; Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 13:11:03 -0600; I would assume: restore, back it up again, rotate it back offsite? It's a pain, but the technology moves somewhat slowly... If you keep the tapes "outside the system", what do you do when there is an; /lists/html/ADSM-L/2004-07/msg00456.html (14,384 bytes)
15. Re: Thoughts on Monthly Archives (score: 1): Author: Steve Harris <Steve_Harris AT HEALTH.QLD.GOV DOT AU>; Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 09:43:50 +1000; Allen, Your post got me thinking as to just why I decided what I did and now I remember :) There was another management requirement that all production servers be backed up in full once per year and; /lists/html/ADSM-L/2004-07/msg00465.html (14,599 bytes)
16. Re: Thoughts on Monthly Archives (score: 1): Author: Gordon Woodward <gordon.woodward AT DB DOT COM>; Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 11:48:10 +1000; Sorry for the late reply, weekend and all that but being from Australia as well you're in the same boat. :-) For our monthlys, on our main fileserver which has about a 1tb of data, we see an average; /lists/html/ADSM-L/2004-07/msg00466.html (16,240 bytes)
17. Re: Thoughts on Monthly Archives (score: 1): Author: asr AT UFL DOT EDU; Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 11:28:21 -0400; Mmm, Arbitrary. Tastes like BUDGET! Actually, I'd disagree that an extra server is a barrier. The reason is that I am finding it to be very simple to maintain several servers on the same hardware. Ri; /lists/html/ADSM-L/2004-07/msg00480.html (12,587 bytes)
18. Re: Thoughts on Monthly Archives (score: 1): Author: Andrew Raibeck <storman AT US.IBM DOT COM>; Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 10:25:00 -0600; Some considerations for long-term archive: - Much of today's data, as it is used from day to day, exists in some product-specific format. If you were to retrieve that data, say, 10 years from now, wo; /lists/html/ADSM-L/2004-07/msg00483.html (12,220 bytes)
19. Re: Thoughts on Monthly Archives (score: 1): Author: Shannon Bach <SBach AT MGE DOT COM>; Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 12:09:16 -0500; For us, it is the beginning of the Sarbanes-Oxley overhaul. I ask those same questions to people all over my company and their response? Well you (me) had better make sure that the data moves with wh; /lists/html/ADSM-L/2004-07/msg00485.html (13,666 bytes)
20. Re: Thoughts on Monthly Archives (score: 1): Author: "Coats, Jack" <Jack.Coats AT BANKSTERLING DOT COM>; Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 12:39:34 -0500; I havn't read the SBO requirements, but from our internal auditors, it looks like we need to have a good business best efforts to keep readable for whatever retention period we publicize. In working; /lists/html/ADSM-L/2004-07/msg00489.html (13,670 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2]