ADSM-L

Re: 7389-01 Re: Re[2]: Different includes/excludes

1997-03-03 14:27:11
Subject: Re: 7389-01 Re: Re[2]: Different includes/excludes
From: Dave Sanders <DSanders AT MASSMUTUAL DOT COM>
Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 14:27:11 -0500
Jerry, this sounds suspicously like an incremental, to me.  This particular
application is changing data during it's cycle.  Since it runs daily then
the "incremental by data" and the "vanill incremental" are exactly the same
as far a file candidates.

----------
> From: Jerry Lawson <jlawson AT THEHARTFORD DOT COM>
> From: Jerry Lawson <jlawson AT THEHARTFORD DOT COM>
> To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> Subject: Re: 7389-01 Re: Re[2]: Different includes/excludes
> Date: Thursday, February 20, 1997 4:00 PM
>
> ---------------------------- Forwarded with Changes
---------------------------
> From: INTERNET.OWNERAD at SNADGATE
> From: INTERNET.OWNERAD at SNADGATE
> Date: 2/20/97 12:59PM
> To: Jerry Lawson at ASUPO
> *To: *ADSM-L at SNADGATE
> Subject: Re: Re[2]: Different includes/excludes
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
---
>
>
> To everyone - this is in response to the note that was attached.  Since
my
> mail server has a tendancy to not let these things through our gateway, I
will
> attach it again to the end of the note.  Sorry for the potential double
mailin
> g.  Also, my mailer seemed to submit my original note twice - it only
shows
> once to me, but I received a rejection from the list server saying it was
a
> duplicate, so I assumed the worst and sent it again.  That was a mistake
on my
> part - I am sorry to contribute to the clutter in your in basket.
>
> -------  Response follows: ----------
>
> If the window on a day isn't big enough, then I would take a look at
doing an
> "Incremental by Date" during the week, and schedule a regular incremental
on
> the weekend.  This has been discussed recently, but in a nutshell, it
works
> like this:
>
> 1.  First the big assumption - You have a complete full backup - the
initial
> one perhaps.
> 2.  An Incr by date is run.  This will back up only files that have
date/time
> stamps newer than the last full backup.  This is run daily (hopefully -
the
> more often it's run, the shorter the runs, obviously).
> 3.  On the weekend, a regular incremental is run.
>
> What happens?  In step 2, only new files and files that have newer dates
get
> backed up.  There is no "clean up" for deleted files, etc., and files
that
> have a "different" date that is less than the date of the last backup are
not
> touched.  There are several exposures here.  But programs that play by
the
> rules should be well protected.  On the weekend, the regular incremental
does
> not back up these files again - instead it only gets any new files, and
then
> does all the clean up - delets files, etc.  Files with "different" dates,
such
> as installed software with compile dates of last year are backed up now.
>
> How do you implement this?  Simply set up 2 separate schedules - one with
a
> weekday frequency, that does the incr by date, and a second that does the
> regular incremental with a frequency of say every Saturday.  You only
need to
> start the schedular once on the client - the server will switch to the
> appropriate schedule as necessary.
>
> Hope this is of some help
>
> Jerry Lawson
> jlawson AT thehartford DOT com
>
>
> ________________________Forward Header________________________
> Author: INTERNET.OWNERAD
> Subject: Re: Re[2]: Different includes/excludes
> 02-20-97 12:59 PM
>
> File item 2 original document name: MEMO 02/20/97  12:59
> File item 2 document type: PCDATA
>
> Text of note follows:
>
> Uh, Jerry,,, I started this thread (at least this time), and the reason
we
> are looking to do this is that ADSM passing data to the mainframe is to
>  slow relative to the amount of data that needs to be passed and the
> processing window.  The client just doesn't have time to send that data
so,
> they are trying to compromise and minimally get weekly backups of that
> particular group of files.
>
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>