ADSM-L

Re: Journaling

2002-11-10 15:12:52
Subject: Re: Journaling
From: Pete Tanenhaus <tanenhau AT US.IBM DOT COM>
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 15:12:12 -0500
No, it's an entirely different paradigm.

Incremental Forever (or progressive incremental) selects candidates for
backup by building comprehensive lists of objects and attributes
from the TSM server (active copies) and from the local file system, and
building a backup candidate list by comparing the two lists.

Objects which exist in the server list but don't exist in local fs list are
expired, objects which exists in the local fs list but don't exist
in the server list are backed up, objects which exist in both lists but
whose attributes are different are either  backed up (usually)
or have their attributes updated on the server.

As previously discussed, Journal Based Backup selects candidates for backup
entirely based on the contents of the file system change
journal database, which is maintained by monitoring the file system for
change activity with the Win32 ReadDirectoryChangesW api.

Hope this answers your question ....

Pete Tanenhaus
Tivoli Storage Solutions Software Development
email: tanenhau AT us.ibm DOT com
tieline: 320.8778, external: 607.754.4213

"Those who refuse to challenge authority are condemned to conform to it"

---------------------- Forwarded by Pete Tanenhaus/San Jose/IBM on
11/10/2002 03:02 PM ---------------------------

"Murray, Jim" <JMurray AT LIBERTY-BANK DOT COM>@VM.MARIST.EDU> on 11/07/2002
03:06:21 PM

Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU>

Sent by:    "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU>


To:    ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
cc:
Subject:    Re: Journaling



Does this mean that any server attached to a SAN will do a FULL backup of
the files on the SAN vice an incremental?  Isn't this the API behind the
TSM
incremental forever philosophy?

Jim Murray
Senior Systems Engineer
Liberty Bank
860.638.2919
jmurray AT liberty-bank DOT com
"I hear and I forget.
I see and I remember.
I do and I understand."
 -Confucius



-----Original Message-----
From: Pete Tanenhaus [mailto:tanenhau AT US.IBM DOT COM]
Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2002 14:57
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Subject: Re: Journaling


Unfortunately this is beyond our (development's) control.

The Microsoft Win32 api used to monitor file system changes does not
support non-local file systems.

It might be possible to write some sort of file system extension (filter)
to implement this type of support but
it would be a major development undertaking and would involve a
considerable investment of time and
resource which I'm not sure management would be willing to consider.


Pete Tanenhaus
Tivoli Storage Solutions Software Development
email: tanenhau AT us.ibm DOT com
tieline: 320.8778, external: 607.754.4213

"Those who refuse to challenge authority are condemned to conform to it"

---------------------- Forwarded by Pete Tanenhaus/San Jose/IBM on
11/07/2002 02:52 PM ---------------------------

"Whitlow, Don" <Don.Whitlow AT QG DOT COM>@VM.MARIST.EDU> on 11/07/2002 02:24:36
PM

Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU>

Sent by:    "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU>


To:    ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
cc:
Subject:    Re: Journaling



I may be adding more questions than I am answering, but why should it
matter
if a disk is SAN-based vs. DAS (local)? I would assume journaling would
work
at the drive letter (logical) level, meaning it would be clueless as to the
underlying disk access method. To the O/S and software, it should just look
like a drive/volume.

Maybe I'm missing something more to the puzzle. But I would think it would
work for you.

Good luck
Don

-----Original Message-----
From: Gill, Geoffrey L. [mailto:GEOFFREY.L.GILL AT SAIC DOT COM]
Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2002 12:28 PM
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Subject: Journaling


Ok I finally figured out why journaling is not working on this server. It's
because the 4 million plus files are on a SAN attached disk and journaling
does not support that, only local.

What good is that????? Is there any good reason to use SAN disk these days
anyway?
Geoff Gill
TSM Administrator
NT Systems Support Engineer
SAIC
E-Mail:    <mailto:gillg AT saic DOT com> gillg AT saic DOT com
Phone:  (858) 826-4062
 Pager:   (877) 905-7154


________________________________________________
The information transmitted is intended only for the person
or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential
and/or privileged material. If you are not the intended
recipient of this message you are hereby notified that any use,
review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution, reproduction
or any action taken in reliance upon this message is prohibited.
If you received this in error, please contact the sender and
delete the material from any computer.  Any views expressed
in this message are those of the individual sender and may
not necessarily reflect the views of the company.
 ________________________________________________

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>