The question is pretty general at this point. My answer to this type of
question is usually another question: "What are you trying to accomplish?",
or "Why do you want to do that?". Usually, there is a smaller subset of
files that would require a larger retention time than most other files.
This is handled by archiving them.

Perhaps if you gave us some more details we could help you out.

Dan Giles
Application Specialist
Manulife Financial, Corporate
Phone: 416-926-3549 Fax: 416-926-5234





From: Wayne Gorton <wayne AT NETTRACK.COM DOT AU> on 99/02/22 01:34 AM GMT

Please respond to wayne AT nettrack.com DOT au

To:   ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
cc:    (bcc: ADSM)
Subject:  We want a different number of copies onsite to offsite




Howdy All,
I would like to know if there is a way (even a sneaky way) to have a
different number of copies onsite versus offsite? Currently we keep x
number according to the copy group, then we perform a backup stg to a
copy storage pool.
There is nowhere in this model to allow for a different retention
requirements?
The only alternative is to not perform offsiting on the main stg pool,
perform another backup (via another node bound to another mgm) to
another stg pool and perform offsiting on this stgpool. Unfortunately
this would mean 3 copies of data, one onsite (kept for a long time) and
2 copies of data being kept for a short time. This would cause the
backup window to increase (not double, since we could run them at the
same time, if the network can handle it).

Is there a better way?