Re: D2D vs. tape backups with TSM?
2004-07-30 11:21:20
Both can be used, both have advantages and disadvantages.
TSM development is focusing efforts on File Device Class.
Search the archives for some info on which to use
(http://msgs.adsm.org/cgi-bin/get/adsm0406/106.html)
Check out the 5.2 Admin guide - it has a nice table comparing disk vs file.
The biggest drawbacks of disk to me are - no reclamation of aggregates and
no multi-session restore. (See the comparisons for more).
-----Original Message-----
From: Robert R Price [mailto:rprice28 AT CSC DOT COM]
Sent: July 30, 2004 9:32 AM
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Subject: Re: D2D vs. tape backups with TSM?
I know that I must be missing something here, but can someone explain why
this D2D backup scheme utilizes what I assume to be the sequential FILE
device type? Why not just use the (random) DISK storage pool type. This
would eliminate any co-location issues, reclaims and not waste ANY disk
space with deleted files? Would someone enlighten me?
|
<Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread> |
- Re: D2D vs. tape backups with TSM?, (continued)
- Re: D2D vs. tape backups with TSM?, Rushforth, Tim
- Re: D2D vs. tape backups with TSM?, Rushforth, Tim
- Re: D2D vs. tape backups with TSM?, Troy Frank
- Re: D2D vs. tape backups with TSM?, Rushforth, Tim
- Re: D2D vs. tape backups with TSM?, Richard Sims
- Re: D2D vs. tape backups with TSM?, Robert R Price
- Re: D2D vs. tape backups with TSM?,
Rushforth, Tim <=
|
|
|