Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[ADSM\-L\]\s+ADSM\-L\s+Win2K3\s+backu\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[ADSM\-L\]\s+ADSM\-L\s+Win2K3\s+backu\s*$/: 4 ]

Total 4 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [ADSM-L] ADSM-L Win2K3 backu (score: 1): Author: Sam Sheppard <SHS AT SDDPC.SANNET DOT GOV>; Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2008 11:33:49 PST; -- Top of message -- Looks like the problem is with our disk pool. I ran a test directly to LTO3 tape and performance improved dramatically, anywhere from 40 to 70MB/sec. So, I've got my Solaris guy; /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2008-02/msg00008.html (14,430 bytes)
2. Re: [ADSM-L] ADSM-L Win2K3 backu (score: 1): Author: James Drozynski <drozynsk AT US.IBM DOT COM>; Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2008 17:09:26 -0500; Hope that does it for you. Just seems a bit strange only one client exhibits the problem. James Drozynski IBM Pittsburgh Lab 11 Stanwix Street Pittsburgh Pa. 15222 Tel:412-667-4421 Fax:412-667-6975 T; /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2008-02/msg00009.html (15,040 bytes)
3. Re: [ADSM-L] ADSM-L Win2K3 backu (score: 1): Author: Sam Sheppard <SHS AT SDDPC.SANNET DOT GOV>; Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2008 14:46:59 PST; -- Top of message -- Can I infer from you comments that you find the FILE DEVCLASS to be a better performer? This is our first server on Unix; our other 2 TSM servers are running on z/OS and have oth; /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2008-02/msg00011.html (12,545 bytes)
4. Re: [ADSM-L] ADSM-L Win2K3 backu (score: 1): Author: Richard Sims <rbs AT BU DOT EDU>; Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2008 08:33:27 -0500; -- Top of message -- Can I infer from you comments that you find the FILE DEVCLASS to be a better performer? This is our first server on Unix; our other 2 TSM servers are running on z/OS and have ot; /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2008-02/msg00014.html (12,790 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 4
Page: [1]