ADSM-L

Re: Fw: Re: Archive x Retention

1998-07-09 00:39:13
Subject: Re: Fw: Re: Archive x Retention
From: Bruce Elrick <belrick AT HOME DOT COM>
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 22:39:13 -0600
If you want to do as you state, do the following:
1) create two mgmtclasses called XX_day and X_day
2) define archive copy groups under each mgmtclass with XX and
X day retentions respectively (no need for backup copy groups, because
you won't use these mgmtclasses in your include/exclude list)
3) on Sunday, run 'archive / /usr /data -subdir=yes -archmc=XX_day' and
and on Saturday run 'archive /blah/* -subdir=yes -X_day'

The copies of the files archived on Saturday and Sunday will be
retained for X and XX days.  If you want to take a full snapshot, you
will have to explicitly list each filesystem, since archives do
not cross filesystem boundaries unless explicitly told in that
manner (otherwise, how would you archive all the files in '/'
without picking up the entire system?).

If you don't use -archmc=<mgmtclass>, the include/exclude list
will be used to determine which mgmtclass each file is archived
against; the archive copy group of each mgmtclass determines
the retention.  Most would agree that this is less useful because
most people want all the files archived together to be retained
for the same period.   If that is your goal, use -archmc and
special archive-only mgmtclasses.  That does not preclude you from
using different mgmtclasses each time.

Unlike backups, once a file is archived, its
retention is set in stone (you can delete archive files however).
Performing subsequent archives using a different -archmc or with
a different include/excluding list which binds files to mgmtclasses
differently will not rebind the previous archive copies, unlike
backups where changing the mgmtclass for a file in the incl/excl
list will cause a rebinding on the next backup of that file,
possibly causing versions to be marked for expiration if the retextra
or verexists parameters differ.

Remember, each time you archive the archive copies are treated
completely independently.  You could probably even archive the
same set of files at the same time to two different mgmtclasses
by using two dsmc processes, although I haven't tried.

I hope this clears things up for you...

Cheers...
Bruce



You have to understand that the way

Leandro Carneiro Torres wrote:
>
> Folks,
> what is the utility of the Policy Set if I can4t control my archive copies
> daily, weekly and monthly ?  This utility is natural !!!
> I4d like to take a snapshot of my machine and archive the files for X days
> in the sunday and XX days in the saturday. Can I use Policy Set (and period
> retention) for this ?
> Until now, I believed so.
> Anybody can help me  with this question ?
>
> Thanks,
> Leandro.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brett Walker <walkerbl AT VNET.IBM DOT COM>
> To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU>
> Date: Terga-feira, 7 de Julho de 1998 20:40
> Subject: Re: Archive x Retention
>
> >Leandro,
> >
> >You need to have 2 management classes (in the same policy set).  Use the
> >ARCHMC command line option to archive the file to one management class of
> >the other (you can also use GUI, which provides a drop-down list of
> >management classes you can archive to).
> >
> >Hope this helps,
> >Brett
> >
> >>Hi,
> >>
> >>I4ve the necessity of archive the my file "/home/leandro/a" with two
> >>retention periods (6 days and 30 days). What is the best way to do this ?
> >>If I define two Policy Sets (6_DAY and 30_DAY) this works ?
> >>
> >>ADSM Version: V3.1
> >>ADSM Server O.S.: NT V.4.0
> >>ADSM Client O.S.: NT V4.0
> >>
> >>
> >>Thanks in advance for any ideas that you may have,
> >>Leandro.
> >>
> >
> >
> >o------------------------------------------------------o
> >  Brett Walker                  ADSM Development, IBM
> >  walkerbl AT vnet.ibm DOT com         tie 276-0265
> >o------------------------------------------------------o
> >"That's just my opinion; I could be wrong."
> >      --- Dennis Miller
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>