On Tuesday 26 October 2004 21:33, Zoltan Forray/AC/VCU wrote:
> I can't agree with the statement "Do a disaster recovery?  Then you never
> need images, only incremental backups."
>
> That is EXACTLY why we need to do IMAGE backups.
I don't agree.  You need image backup for the disks with mails (I hope you 
don't store them on the os disks) and incremental backups for the os files.

> When our mail systems disk array died, it took >15 DAYS to restore
> >15MILLION individual files. The slowness was due to OS overhead trying to
> restore/register that many files
Was this for the os of the client or the os of the TSM server?

> TSM was constantly idle/waiting.   Total 
> storage was only 400GB. If we would have had an IMAGE backup to restore
> the affected filesystem and then did incremental restore from that point,
> we feel the recovery would have been considerably shorter !
Ok, you are right, there is no single solution for the problem.

Stef

-- 
stef.coene AT docum DOT org
 "Using Linux as bandwidth manager"
     http://www.docum.org/