ADSM-L

comparison studies ?

1993-10-05 19:42:00
Subject: comparison studies ?
From: "Joseph A. Faracchio {510} 642-7638 {w}" <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 5 Oct 1993 16:42:00 PDT
I am getting some 'heat' from people that want to use Retrospect Remote to
backup there Mac workstations.

With WDSF/VM there was no argument.  Without a host-initiated backup
capability there was no comparison.  And Retrospect Remote has a
server initiated backup process that even turns off the Mac afterwards.
With ADSM available I now have an alternate server scheduled capability
to offer a new group of users.

But now I'm faced with the question of how much resource is taken up
in the Client MAC when the backups are NOT running.  Retrospect has the
capability of *launching* the program by sending a command 'down the wire'
to the Mac workstation.   The Mac workstation need only be running an
OS extension that is watching for this launch command and takes up very
little room.

As far as I can see the Mac program takes 1 to 1 1/2 megs memory while
loaded and even when not backing up a workstation but in schedule mode.
I envisioned adding ADSM Scheduler to everyone's startup folder but now
the fact that it may take 1 or more megs of space while idle makes this
product look unacceptable.

Is this true?   Are there no 'stub' programs in ADSM that can take up less room
until the backup program needs to be up and running??

thanks ,... joe.f.
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>