--J/dobhs11T7y2rNN
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

* Tim Hoke <thoke AT northpeak DOT org> [2005-08-21 08:34]:
>=20
> Another possible solution would be to initiate two restores.  First,=20
> the Full, then the Cumulative.

The whole point behind this is that you shouldn't have to do that. You
select the Full and the Cume and let NetBackup figure out what the most
recent file is. Otherwise, you are duplicating work and also potentially
restoring files that have been deleted since the cume was run. And, no,
TIR is not an appropriate answer to that because I am talking about a
very basic function, just the Full and Cume should be sufficient.

The root of the issue is that if you have, say
Full
Inc
Inc
Inc
Cume

and you select everything from the Full to the Cume, you will
potentially restore files that have intentionally been deleted. At least
NetBackup IS smart enough to figure out what the LATEST version of a
file is and restore only that one, but you SHOULD be able to restore
just the Full and Cume, otherwise what's the point of having the Cumes?
A Full/Cume combo is similar to the results from using TIR without the
overhead.

TIR does get you a more accurate point-in-time restore of a whole
directory, but does add time and size to the backup and the catalog.=20

--=20
David Rock
david AT graniteweb DOT com

--J/dobhs11T7y2rNN
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFDCJWgMrO4/Yb/xwYRAjhYAKCq76dFN2j2Q3hNN8nJVIVF0+pU1wCgjZOl
UIcXunElwV6mSL98dD2YFuI=
=w2xA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--J/dobhs11T7y2rNN--