The behavior shown is expected if the TSM server's inventory includes any
backups of files that have been deleted from the client file systems
involved. The first incremental backups of each of the various /MOUNT/...
and /usr1/... file systems after the include/exclude file would have
caused rebinding of backups of files in those file systems to the new
management class. The rebinding would have affected both the active
backups (the ones that match the current file contents) and inactive
backups (the ones that match older versions of the file contents).
However, there is no mechanism for rebinding the inactive backups of
files that no longer exist on client systems.
> I have a client running Sun Solaris 5.8 with client version 5.1.5
> TSM server is AIX 4.3.3 running TSM 5.1.6.5
>
> Below is the include/exclude list from the dsm.sys
>
> include * shared_dynamic_60
> include /adsmorc/.../* database_class
> include /dev/.../* database_class
> include /udb/.../* database_class
> include /MOUNT/.../* database_0
> include /usr1/.../* database_0
>
> exclude /tmp/.../*
>
> we recently add the last two includes, stopped and started the client, and
the o
> bjects were rebound.
>
> my problem is that in the expire inventory process i get this
>
> 08/27/03 15:02:02 ANR4391I Expiration processing node PACSARCH_SOLARIS,
>
> filespace /usr1/GATE, fsId 7, domain STANDARD, and
>
> management class SHARED_DYNAMIC_60 - for BACKUP type
>
> files.
>
> 08/27/03 15:02:03 ANR4391I Expiration processing node PACSARCH_SOLARIS,
>
> filespace /usr1/EXPORT, fsId 8, domain STANDARD, and
>
> management class SHARED_DYNAMIC_60 - for BACKUP type
>
> files.
>
> 08/27/03 15:02:04 ANR4391I Expiration processing node PACSARCH_SOLARIS,
>
> filespace /MOUNT/MISC, fsId 9, domain STANDARD, and
>
> management class SHARED_DYNAMIC_60 - for BACKUP type
>
> files.
>
> 08/27/03 15:02:05 ANR4391I Expiration processing node PACSARCH_SOLARIS,
>
> filespace /usr1/ICACHE/1, fsId 10, domain STANDARD,
and
>
> management class SHARED_DYNAMIC_60 - for BACKUP type
>
>
> notice that the management class is not what the include says it should be.
|
