Richard,

Thanks for your response. In fact you just confirmed what I thought : my
old TSM server (6H0) must have reached it's limits ! Time to buy some
hardware, our CFO will be pleased hearing this ;-)
Cheers.

Arnaud 

************************************************************************
******
Panalpina Management Ltd., Basle, Switzerland, CIT Department
Viadukstrasse 42, P.O. Box 4002 Basel/CH
Phone:  +41 (61) 226 11 11, FAX: +41 (61) 226 17 01
Direct: +41 (61) 226 19 78
e-mail: arnaud.brion AT panalpina DOT com
************************************************************************
******

-----Original Message-----
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU] On Behalf Of
Richard Sims
Sent: Monday, 18 October, 2004 19:40
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Subject: Re: Prioritizing a restore ...

On Oct 18, 2004, at 12:05 PM, PAC Brion Arnaud wrote:

> I had hard times, couple of days ago, explaining our management why 
> the restore of an important informix server took more than 12 hours 
> because it was made at the same time (middle of the night) than all 
> the nightly backups, and that TSM server seemed to be overflown by all

> that data ...
>
> Therefore my question : is there any way giving a restore process a 
> higher prioryty than any other server activity, to ensure a faster 
> restore ?

Arnaud - I believe that an Informix restoral would follow the standard
          TSM convention where, per the TSM Admin Guide ("Preemption of
Client or Server Operations"), restorals inherently have a high
priority, as the product's raison d'etre.  Perhaps you have the
NOPREEMPT server option in effect?  If not, check your Activity Log for
what the story is.

    Richard Sims