It means that they are treated as if you had deleted the file from your
file system: the backup version would be marked INACTIVE, and all existing
backup versions will be deleted from the TSM server database per the
management class/copygroup retention settings.

Whether this is acceptable to you is your decision. Personally, I would
not manage my backup versions of existing files in this manner, as it is
risky at best, and is not how TSM was intended to be used.

Regards,

Andy

Andy Raibeck
IBM Software Group
Tivoli Storage Manager Client Development
Internal Notes e-mail: Andrew Raibeck/Tucson/IBM@IBMUS
Internet e-mail: storman AT us.eyebm DOT com (change eye to i to reply)

The only dumb question is the one that goes unasked.
The command line is your friend.
"Good enough" is the enemy of excellence.




Jurjen Oskam <jurjen AT QUADPRO.STUPENDOUS DOT ORG>
Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU>
08/21/2002 13:11
Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager"


        To:     ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
        cc:
        Subject:        Re: Override include-exclude list in Unix-client for 
one session



On Wed, Aug 21, 2002 at 09:08:16AM -0400, Andy Raibeck wrote:

> files during that backup. However, the next time you run a backup with
> your original include/exclude list, any backup versions of the database
> files will be expired (because they are excluded).

What do you mean exactly by "expired"?

 * Marked inactive, or
 * Deleted from the TSM database

It's a bit confusing to see the TSM ba-client say that it has "expired" a
file, while the TSM server means something entirely different with
"expiring" (i.e.: permanently deleting things from the database). The
client's "expiring" is the server's "marking inactive".

(Am I right in this? As I said, it's a bit confusing, especially for
somebody whose first language isn't English :-) )


To get back to the story, if it's the former (marking inactive), that
could
be acceptable *if* the retain-only and versions-deleted parameters are
acceptable. However, I think your solution (FREQUENCY setting at 9999) is
much cleaner, and I'll implement that. Thanks for the excellent
explanation!

--
Jurjen Oskam

PGP Key available at http://www.stupendous.org/