Re: [Networker] Index vs. saveset browse/retention policies
2009-05-27 17:09:38
In regard to: Re: [Networker] Index vs. saveset browse/retention policies,...:
Is there something obvious I've overlooked? Can I somehow force X &
Y's
indexes to be subject to the shorter policies? Or is this just the way
it
is?
Sure, nsrmm will do that for you. Look at the last usage synopsis in
the
man page (or PDF docs of the man page, since it appears you may be on
windows). You want the -w and -e options, as well as the saveset ids.
OK - I see how I could script that (I'm on Solaris, backing up several
platforms) after the fact, and indeed I may have to do that. Do you know
if there's a way to force the index for a given client to be subject to
that client's policies (instead of the backup server) when written,
instead of manually after the fact?
Maybe someone else knows of a way to do that, but I'm not aware of any
way of doing that automatically.
Tim
--
Tim Mooney Tim.Mooney AT ndsu DOT
edu
Enterprise Computing & Infrastructure 701-231-1076 (Voice)
Room 242-J6, IACC Building 701-231-8541 (Fax)
North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND 58105-5164
To sign off this list, send email to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu and type
"signoff networker" in the body of the email. Please write to networker-request
AT listserv.temple DOT edu if you have any problems with this list. You can access the
archives at http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/networker.html or
via RSS at http://listserv.temple.edu/cgi-bin/wa?RSS&L=NETWORKER
|
|
|