Julie,

Are you sure PITDATE will solve your problem?  The purpose of PITDATE is
to restore to a date earlier than the last back taken.  Is your weekly
ARCServe backup changing a file attribute for every file which then
causes ADSM to do a full backup?  Granted,  the amount of time is still
unacceptable, but I've restored 10 GB in much less time, although never
on Novell.

Julie Phinney wrote:
>
> It turns out that's the answer.    Thanks to all who responded.  I just got
> off the phone with IBM.   If you use -PITDATE (or I assume -FROMDATE)
> ADSM first scans the database, and mounts the tapes that it needs, only.
> If you use -REP=ALL -IFN    it essentially does a -REP=ALL, mounting every
> tape and moving every file, and at the last second, only replaces it if
> newer.   I should have used fromdate (or -pitdate?)  to bring the machine
> to current after a weekend tape made by Arcserve.    I would not have had a
> No-Query-Restore, but it surely (?) would have been faster.   I'll see if I
> can get a test done.
> Thanks,
> Julie
>
> Doug Thorneycroft <dthorneycroft AT LACSD DOT ORG> on 11/13/98 09:18:11 AM
>
> Please respond to dthorneycroft AT lacsd DOT org
>
> To:   ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> cc:    (bcc: Julie Phinney/Green Bay/Humana)
> Subject:  Re: No query restore rep=all -ifn
>
> Julie have you tried using the -fromdate and -fromtime options to
> restore
> only fies backed up after the date and time of your ArcServ backup.
>
> Julie Phinney wrote:
> >
> > I just got very bad news today from IBM about ADSM and I'm hoping that
> it's
> > wrong and one of you can shed some light on this situation.
> > Our "theoretical" disaster recovery plan is to use ArcServe weekly and
> ADSM
> > nightly and when a disaster happens, restore from the weekly backup with
> > Arcserve... then do an ADSM restore  -REP=ALL  -IFN     to JUST restore
> > anything  that's newer than the weekly backup done by Arcserve.   We'd
> > expect a reasonable few hours to scan a 10 GB drive and restore anything
> > that's newer.
> > Well we had a  Novell machine die a couple weeks ago.  Around 10GB,  and
> > 450,000 files.  The mainframe ADSM 3.1.2.0 server is using OS/390 2.5,
> > TCPIP 3.4 and a Fast Ethernet 100mbs  OSA2 adaptor.
> > We restored using a weekly Arcserve backup.  There should have been few
> > changes left to restore using ADSM.    The ADSM Client was 3.1.0.3.
> > We started the restore with ADSM  using -REP=ALL  and -IFN   which is a
> No
> > Query Restore - our supposed ace-in-the-hole for fast restore.   We let
> it
> > run for about 20 hours a day, every day, when we had to stop it for some
> > reason or another.  It started back in the beginning every day, because
> > RESTART RESTORE  doesn't work with the -IFN parameter  (IBM created an
> APAR
> > on that for me).    After 5 days of starting it back from the beginning
> > and letting it run for 20 hours and it never finished and not letting the
> > users have the machine  back   we finally  GAVE UP.   and gave the
> machine
> > back to the users.
> > I noticed the session counts on that 20hour thing  every day   showed  6
> or
> > more GB  being sent.  And I KNEW  very little should actually be moving,
> > and it SHOULD be less and less every day.   And it was mounting many
> tapes
> > every day.   It was as if we weren't using -IFNewer.
> >
> > So I did a trace for IBM.   I picked a small directory that has 30 files
> in
> > it and no subdirectories.  It needs nothing restored.  I did a RES
> > -REP=ALL  -IFN.    It mounted 9 tapes and showed session counts with more
> > bytes than the total of what was in the directory.  And NOTHING was
> > restored (as nothing should have been).
> > And IBM told me that is how a No Query Restore works with -IFN.     EVERY
> > tape is mounted, EVERY FILE MOVED to the client    OVER THE NETWORK
> where
> > it is then compared.   And only replaced if the file is newer.
> > They will submit a design change request for me.
> >
> > So then, is our only choice for Disaster Recovery  to use nightly
> Arcserve?
> > Or nightly ADSM, which has already been ruled out as un-viable for quick
> > simultaneous recovery of many large drives.   Can't we make these things
> > work together?   How can I get ADSM to do a reasonably quick scan of the
> > drive and only move what's newer.  I am astonished that that is how it
> > works.   I've been using ADSM for years and can't believe I never noticed
> > before that -IFN moves every file first before it compares it.
> Goodness,
> > it's got to be faster to skip the -IFN and just use  -REP=ALL.
> > Somebody please tell me  that my IBM rep is wrong before I have to break
> > this news to management.  Or help me come up with a different combination
> > of parms to offer as an alternative.
> > THANKS!!!
> > Julie

--
Ray Pratts              Pinnacle Computer Solutions Corp.
Ray Pratts              Pinnacle Computer Solutions Corp.
Tel. 281-893-3249       rpratts AT pinnaclecs DOT com