Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Making\s+TSM\s+twin\-center\s+compliant\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Making\s+TSM\s+twin\-center\s+compliant\s*$/: 12 ]

Total 12 documents matching your query.

1. Making TSM twin-center compliant (score: 1): Author: "Loon, E.J. van - SPLXM" <Eric-van.Loon AT KLM DOT COM>; Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2006 13:17:17 +0200; Hi *SM-ers! We are about to implement a second (fallback) IT center on another location. The idea is to create a hot standby environment for TSM. We are already using a separate copypool which will b; /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2006-09/msg00000.html (13,236 bytes)
2. Re: Making TSM twin-center compliant (score: 1): Author: "Allen S. Rout" <asr AT UFL DOT EDU>; Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2006 10:00:14 -0400; Sure it does. In fact, you can do exactly as you describe; biggest impact will be that the copy stgpools are usually (very) poorly optimized for client restore. Think of it carefully: Two TSM server; /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2006-09/msg00001.html (13,925 bytes)
3. Re: Making TSM twin-center compliant (score: 1): Author: "Allen S. Rout" <asr AT UFL DOT EDU>; Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2006 10:04:55 -0400; If you intend to be able to continue normal operations at your recovery site, you will need sufficient capacity to run all your primary work, and your copies too. This means your recovery library wi; /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2006-09/msg00002.html (12,351 bytes)
4. Re: Making TSM twin-center compliant (score: 1): Author: "Prather, Wanda" <Wanda.Prather AT JHUAPL DOT EDU>; Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2006 10:21:03 -0400; Hi Eric, In a disaster, you mark your primary pool volumes "destroyed", but they are still in your DB, along with all the appropriate file entries. If you start backing up again, TSM just continues d; /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2006-09/msg00003.html (16,614 bytes)
5. Re: Making TSM twin-center compliant (score: 1): Author: "Loon, E.J. van - SPLXM" <Eric-van.Loon AT KLM DOT COM>; Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2006 16:31:30 +0200; Hi Allen! Thank you very much for your reaction! Correct me if I'm wrong, but as far as I know, you cannot backup to a copypool. Am I wrong here? I cannot wait for the restore storagepool to finish..; /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2006-09/msg00004.html (15,962 bytes)
6. Re: Making TSM twin-center compliant (score: 1): Author: Kelly Martin <kelly.lynn.martin AT GMAIL DOT COM>; Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2006 09:59:22 -0500; On 9/1/06, Loon, E.J. van - SPLXM <Eric-van.Loon AT klm DOT com> wrote: Hi Allen! Thank you very much for your reaction! Correct me if I'm wrong, but as far as I know, you cannot backup to a copypool; /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2006-09/msg00005.html (12,584 bytes)
7. Re: Making TSM twin-center compliant (score: 1): Author: Len Boyle <Len.Boyle AT SAS DOT COM>; Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2006 10:55:30 -0400; Hello Eric, You will only require scratch tapes in the primary pool or that TSM can move into the primary pool to do backups. TSM really does not think of working with tape-sets, it thinks of working; /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2006-09/msg00006.html (17,059 bytes)
8. Re: Making TSM twin-center compliant (score: 1): Author: Jurjen Oskam <jurjen AT STUPENDOUS DOT ORG>; Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2006 18:38:49 +0200; No, but that's not a problem. Suppose you have a disaster. At the DR site, you have all your copypool data, but all your primary pool volumes are marked DESTROYED. At that point, you just insert some; /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2006-09/msg00009.html (12,280 bytes)
9. Re: Making TSM twin-center compliant (score: 1): Author: "Allen S. Rout" <asr AT UFL DOT EDU>; Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2006 12:48:15 -0400; No, you can't back up to a copy pool. But you don't care. You've got your series of primary stgpools, which are populated with volumes that are "unavailable". You've got your copy stgpools, which ho; /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2006-09/msg00010.html (12,708 bytes)
10. Re: Making TSM twin-center compliant (score: 1): Author: "Allen S. Rout" <asr AT UFL DOT EDU>; Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2006 12:50:18 -0400; Ooo, Wanda. You are Kewl. - Allen S. Rout - Now I've got to write up ANOTHER proposal.; /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2006-09/msg00011.html (12,095 bytes)
11. Re: Making TSM twin-center compliant (score: 1): Author: "Prather, Wanda" <Wanda.Prather AT JHUAPL DOT EDU>; Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2006 13:16:54 -0400; Allen, Thanks for the kind words, but it's not me, it's the Fibre. One of my sites is buying a VTL to replace the primary pool. But putting the VTL OFFSITE, and keeping the 3584 for the Copypool onsi; /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2006-09/msg00012.html (13,264 bytes)
12. Re: Making TSM twin-center compliant (score: 1): Author: Aaron Durkee <ADurkee AT CHSBUFFALO DOT ORG>; Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2006 13:26:00 -0400; Yes, we have some luxeries others don't. Our MAN/WAN is sufficent with dark fiber to back up cross site, so in the nature of the backup its offsite as soon as its complete. Since tape needs a copy in; /usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2006-09/msg00013.html (18,480 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 12
Page: [1]