Re: NT Journal Backups
2001-08-31 09:47:00
In a word: portability.
A design centered around NTFS 5's journal file system would be pretty
limiting in that it isn't portable to other platforms. Note that the TSM
journal-based backup feature is available not only for Windows 2000, but
also for NT 4.0 -- something we could not do if we based our
implementation on the Windows 2000 NTFS 5 support. Not only that, but a
platform independent design makes it easier to port to non-Windows
platforms, should we choose to do so in the future.
Regards,
Andy
Andy Raibeck
IBM Tivoli Systems
Tivoli Storage Manager Client Development
Internal Notes e-mail: Andrew Raibeck/Tucson/IBM@IBMUS
Internet e-mail: araibeck AT us.ibm DOT com
The only dumb question is the one that goes unasked.
The command line is your friend.
"Good enough" is the enemy of excellence.
Andrew Webster <andrew.webster AT DB DOT COM>
Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU>
08/31/2001 00:47
Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager"
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
cc:
Subject: NT Journal Backups
Been reading up on 4.2 Journal Backups.
Windows 2000 provides a journal file system (NTFS 5) but the TSM 4.2
client doesn't use it. (as I understand it) Instead it implements it owns
journal service (daemon) that monitors the filesystems and updates a
database when it changes. This seems odd, when NTFS 5 supports journaling
and has an associated API.
Can someone from Tivoli explain why the client was implemented this way?
Regards
Andrew Webster
--
This e-mail may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you
This e-mail may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you
are not the intended recipient (or have received this e-mail in error)
please notify the sender immediately and destroy this e-mail. Any
unauthorized copying, disclosure or distribution of the material in this
e-mail is strictly forbidden.
|
|
|