ADSM-L

Re: Backup Question

2000-08-23 10:39:45
Subject: Re: Backup Question
From: "Cook, Dwight E" <cookde AT BP DOT COM>
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 09:29:57 -0500
that is one valid way but you run into a lot of network traffic, sending
that across the net again...
you could do an export of the node(s) active data only, which would give you
a snapshot of the nodes but based on how big they are you might need to
ensure they go to a storage pool with collocation=yes and maybe not back
them up over the weekend while you export them
(and exports aren't the fastest things to run and if you have tape errors
they will die and required to be rerun...ie someone watching them over the
weekend)
Or just put them into their own storage pool and do the "backup stg" against
that and just keep those tapes offsite... it isn't exactly what they are
describing but what they are talking about is an old technology way of doing
things... I think they need an education on what current methods are
(another chance  for you to point out why they need to pay you more !  they
are behind the times and you aren't)

just my thoughts ;-)

Dwight

> ----------
> From:         Lawrence Clark[SMTP:Larry_Clark AT thruway.state.ny DOT us]
> Reply To:     ADSM: Dist Stor Manager
> Sent:         Wednesday, August 23, 2000 8:43 AM
> To:   ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> Subject:      Re: Backup Question
>
> Hi:
> Along with your incremental backups you could define an archive pool for
> those NT servers with a arive-life of 30 days and do a full-archive of the
> servers on a weekly basis, checking out the target volumes after each
> archive.
>
> What do the gods say? :>)
>
> >>> Chris.Johnson AT MARRIOTT DOT COM 08/23/00 09:43AM >>>
> ADSM Gods,
>
> Our environment is that we keep 7 versions of a file with AIX server
> backing
> up NT clients (servers).  I have two NT clients that need to create an
> off-site, full image of these two clients-- Once a week then recycle each
> tape on a monthly rotation. Feasible?
>
> If so, point me in a direction please
>
> Thanks,
>
> CJ
>
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>