Networker

Re: [Networker] Index vs. saveset browse/retention policies

2009-05-28 14:07:17
Subject: Re: [Networker] Index vs. saveset browse/retention policies
From: A Darren Dunham <ddunham AT TAOS DOT COM>
To: NETWORKER AT LISTSERV.TEMPLE DOT EDU
Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 18:03:57 +0000
On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 11:52:05AM -0500, Len Philpot wrote:
> > windows).  You want the -w and -e options, as well as the saveset ids.
> 
> I'm on Solaris, and the nsrmm man page refers to the nsr_getdate(1m) man 
> page for the date format. The only nsr_getdate man page is in section 3 
> and refers to the C function, not the user interface.

Since both accept a string, the man page is still fine for detailing the
format.  It's just you'll be giving the string to nsrmm, and it'll hand
it to nsr_getdate() to turn it into a specific timestamp.

> I suspect the date 
> format should be along the lines of "24 hours", etc., rather than a policy 
> name. Do you have any examples of the date format, eg., setting it to a 
> week in the future? Is it relative or an absolute number of days, etc.?

You can give either relative or absolute times.

one week
last month
60 days
4 PM
05/30/2009
05/30
Sat May 30 15:22:11
1243722131

(It doesn't talk about taking epoch timestamps in the manpage, but they
are valid.)

-- 
Darren

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