ADSM-L

Re: ***The JOURNALED BACKUP saga continues...***

2002-01-10 18:32:37
Subject: Re: ***The JOURNALED BACKUP saga continues...***
From: Bill Colwell <bcolwell AT DRAPER DOT COM>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 15:47:55 -0500
In <OFD81E2B2B.573B955C-ON85256B3D.006DC3E1 AT pok.ibm DOT com>, on 01/10/02
   at 03:47 PM, Pete Tanenhaus <tanenhau AT US.IBM DOT COM> said:

>Answers/Comments to questions......

<snip>

>The primary performance benefit over normal incremental backup is
>eliminating
>scanning the entire local file system.

This is a definitely a client-centric view!  From my server-centric view
I think the primary benefit is the elimiation of the server processing to
generate and download the whole activeset metadata.

I am planning to roll out 4.2.1.15 clients on new xp machines, implementing
both journalling and subfile backups at the same time, and to upgrade
500+ win2k machines to this level.

These are all desktop machines, not the kind of machines so far described
as the ideal candidates for journalling, but I am focusing on the server
savings.  (My server is tsm 4.2.1.7 on os/390 2.10).


--
--------------------------
--------------------------
Bill Colwell
Bill Colwell
C. S. Draper Lab
Cambridge, Ma.
bcolwell AT draper DOT com
--------------------------
=========================================================================