Networker

Re: [Networker] Fw: Problemwith the recycling of clones

2003-01-08 21:06:36
Subject: Re: [Networker] Fw: Problemwith the recycling of clones
From: George Scott <George.Scott AT ITS.MONASH.EDU DOT AU>
To: NETWORKER AT LISTMAIL.TEMPLE DOT EDU
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 13:04:13 +1100
Kenneth,

> I have been over this problem for a while now, and reading the NSRMM man
> pages I find the following statement with the -o option
> "The [not]recyclable mode applies to both volumes or save sets, but not
> clones."
>
> I read this as if I should be able to mark a volume recyclable with 'nsrmm
> -o recyclable -V volid' and save my clone entries in the media db, but that
> isn't so, it marks everything recycable and next time nsrim is run the
> clone is also recyclable. Is this a bug ? or is my english skills worse
> than I thought ?

It must be your English skills.  It couldn't possibly be the
documentation; it's perfect. :-)

It is trying to say that that you can use "nsrmm -o recyclable" on
volumes and save sets, but you can't use it on clones.

To expand this out some more, these examples are both valid commands:

nsrmm -o recyclable -V my_vol
nsrmm -o recyclable -S 1234

but this is not:

nsrmm -o recyclable -S 1234/56

To my mind the concept of clones, as implemented in the current
NetWorker, has limited usefulness.

I'd much prefer to be able to create duplicate copies of save sets.
Once created the two copies could be manipulated independently of each
other.  So you could, for example, copy a favourite save set to another
piece of media and delete or recycle the original.

While I'm on the topic: the idea of having special "clone" media pool
types that clones must exclusively be written to is an unnecessarily
restrictive crock too.  I should be able to write clones to which ever
pool I like.  "Is a clone" / "is not a clone" / "do not care" should be
one of the pool selection criteria (like client and level are now) so
that I could choose to have an exclusive clone pool if I wanted to.  If
I choose to mix my clone save sets with original save sets I should be
able to do that too.  I am happy with dire warnings in large print in
the manuals or even "it looks like you are doing something dumb"
messages from commands.

It is probably acceptable to have a restriction that a clone can not be
on the same piece of media as the original, but forcing a totally
separate and exclusive pool is overkill (albeit much easier to
program...).

Many products that have been dumbed down for the mass market tend to be
too restrictive for more experienced users.  NetWorker seems to be
another example.  It has lots of promising features, but once you get
more experienced it becomes frustrating to use.  It is like someone
walking just in front of you; you are always on your guard trying not
to step on his heels.  A team member walking next to you ready to
tackle the next problem would be much more useful.

Enough philosophy for one day...

George.
--
George Scott           George.Scott AT its.monash DOT edu
Systems Programmer, IT Services, Monash University

--
Note: To sign off this list, send a "signoff networker" command via email
to listserv AT listmail.temple DOT edu or visit the list's Web site at
http://listmail.temple.edu/archives/networker.html where you can
also view and post messages to the list.
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>