One thing I would want to double check is that with the EXCLUDE, if a
     file is found to be excluded yet there exists backup versions... all
     those versions are expired (backups, not archives) So if you are
     looking at excluding files but want to have some form of backup, you
     will need to push an archive of that file to be safe.
     (like I said... this would be worth a double check 'cause it has been
     over a year and a version change since I checked it)

     later,
           Dwight


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: "saving" tapes (or management's ideas...)
Author:  zvika (zvika AT AESERV.TECHNION.AC DOT IL) at unix,mime
Date:    1/26/99 12:59 AM


Dwight,

Thanks for your analysis. The problem however, is that I cannot know beforehand
which files would be doomed for non-backup, and these files are scattered
all over the users' filesystems. It is perfectly possible (and this is the
way it probably will be) that in a directory some files will be still in the
normal backup, and others (old ones) to be non-backed up, so wildcarding and
doamins are of little (if any) help. In addition, what would happen once a file
from the "non-backup" is changed and should be backed up ?

Regards,
/Zvika

On Mon, 25 Jan 1999 decook AT amoco DOT com wrote:

>      *** numerous include/exclude statements...
>         each file on the client is run through (bottom to top) the
>      include/exclude list until a match is found.  If your hit rate of a
>      client file in your include exclude list made a nice bell curve around
>      the median entry (which it probably won't since these lists tend to
>      EXCLUDE files and any comparisons that purculate out the top are
>      included by default) you would have say :
>      10 million client files
>      10 thousand excludes
>      nice 50% average hit rate
>      yields 50,000,000,000 (50 billion comparisons)
>      BUT like I said, mainly excludes with default includes if no match
>      found so I'd use 90% for the average excludes compared prior to a
>      decision being made so we would have 90 billion comparisons.
>      OK, how fast is your CPU ? ? ?
>      Still boils down to 0 is way less than 50 billion which is less than
>      90 billion.
>
>      That's why there is the "DOMAIN" statements... domains are file
>      systems / volumes / (platform specific whatever) and if the fs/vol/xxx
>      isn't in the domain, the files within never make it to the
>      include/exclude's.  100 files compared in an incl/excl of 101 with the
>      top entry being a wildcarded entry to catch all 100 of your compared
>      files will still yield 10,000 comparisons just to back up ZERO of the
>      files... if the files were all on a single volume and that volume
>      wasn't listed in the domain statement... 1 compare would exclude all
>      of them (more or less... they wouldn't even be built into the list to
>      run through the inclexcl)
>
>      this still leaves you with a ton of manual work to seperate & isolate
>      data on your client servers...
>
>      look at it as job security !
>
>      Hope the adsm info is a little help
>      later,
>            Dwight
>