We have started a process where we created a seperate node for DR.
(ie nodeDR.)
We scheduled weekly backups. The management class we are using only
maintains active backups. This has helped keep tapes to a minimum.
We still do backups for node? daily, maintaining 8 inactive backups.
At 04:42 PM 6/25/96 -0400, you wrote:
>Bill,
> Even with collocation enabled, the 'active' client data does tend to
>get spread across many tapes. How many depends on the amount of client
>data and number of versions kept. However, what is more troublesome is
>when a user needs their entire directory/file structure restored. In
>one instance, on one of our larger Netware 3.1x servers, this required
>about 45 tape mounts and took hours to complete, even though there was
>only about 60 MB of data being restored.
> One method of avoiding this problem, outside of using very new tape
>technology (i.e. 3590's emulating 3490's on MVS), is to perform
>periodic full backups but this a little kludgy to automate via the ADSM
>scheduler. I had posted a suggestion to the ADSM-R server requesting an
>option or switch within reclamation that would allow you to collocate
>the 'active' client data onto a subset of that client's tapes when
>reclamation occurred. Granted, this would not be something you'd want
>to do very often due to the overhead involved but it would be a nice
>option to have in instances such as you described. This suggestion did
>not meet with much enthusiasm.
>
>Tim Pittson
>tpittson AT himail.hcc DOT com
>>----------
>>From: William Kral[SMTP:wkral AT TNE DOT COM]
>>Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 1996 4:43 PM
>>To: Multiple recipients of list ADSM-L
>>Subject: ADSM Full Server/Drive Restores
>>
>> We are in the process of looking into ADSM on MVS to backup 120
>>servers on the LAN.... One of my main concerns is doing a full drive or
>>
>>server restore after a period of months/years have gone by. Can anyone
>>share
>>their experiences with me? I'm afraid that to restore and entire drive
>>or
>>server, I could possibly be looking at 50 - 100 or more tape mounts
>>because
>>the live data will be sprinkled out on many many many tapes. I know
>>co-location is an option, but I have to think their will still be a
>>number
>>of tapes and mounts that need to be looked after.
>> Any comments on this would be greatly appreciated....
>>
>>Thanks in advance Bill Kral TNE - WKral AT TNE DOT COM
>>
>
>
|