ADSM-L

Re: [ADSM-L] Windows PIT Restore issues

2009-02-27 11:30:51
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] Windows PIT Restore issues
From: Andrew Raibeck <storman AT US.IBM DOT COM>
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2009 11:29:54 -0500
Yes, you are on the right track looking at the management class.

See http://www.mail-archive.com/adsm-l AT vm.marist DOT edu/msg07963.html for my
explanation of why you see what you see.

Best regards,

Andy

Andy Raibeck
IBM Software Group
Tivoli Storage Manager Client Product Development
Level 3 Team Lead
Internal Notes e-mail: Andrew Raibeck/Tucson/IBM@IBMUS
Internet e-mail: storman AT us.ibm DOT com

IBM Tivoli Storage Manager support web page:
http://www.ibm.com/software/sysmgmt/products/support/IBMTivoliStorageManager.html


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

"ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU> wrote on 02/27/2009
11:16:45 AM:

> [image removed]
>
> Windows PIT Restore issues
>
> Kevin Boatright
>
> to:
>
> ADSM-L
>
> 02/27/2009 11:18 AM
>
> Sent by:
>
> "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU>
>
> Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager"
>
> Attempting to do a point in time restore on a windows 2003 server
> using the Gui client.  If I go back more than one day, I do not see
> all of the folders in the root of the drive.  I see four out of
> eight folders.
>
> TSM Client version 5.3.4.8
> TSM Server version 5.3.4.2
>
> Performing a point in time restore from the command line works fine.
> I can see all of the folders.
>
> I was thinking it may have something to do with the management class
> bound to the folders.
>
> select class_name from backups where node_name='NODENAME' and
> type='DIR' group by class_name
>
> CLASS_NAME
> ------------------
> MC7YR
>
>
> MC7YR Management class details
> Versions Data Exists           2
> Version Data Deleted          1
> Retain Extra Versions          30
> Retain Only Version             2600
>
>
> Anyone seen this behavior?
>
> Thanks,
> Kevin

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