I have been reading this thread from the beginning, and I just wanted to
place my "two cents" in here :-)....Veritas actually wrote the code for
MS long ago. MS has adopted the basic backup-exec code and improved on
it a bit..This being right from both MS and Veritas techs...

What I have not read in this TSM thread is how anyone is backing up
their AD with TSM...I am sure I will get responses saying that they do
and they have had No problem...However, TSM in a PAR has admitted that
they do not backup the SYSTEM State all too well..It has problems
closing out the AD DB when its complete, leaving you to pull your hair
out because you need to do Authoritative restore and "OOPS"...the AD DB
backup is no truly complete. So we use NTBackup to a BKF file
(overwritten nightly, and TSM to backup that BKF. However, couple this
with Exchange in the AD and you have an expensive mess with TSM and the
agents.  Also, even though TSM has books filled with HOW TO in a "MS"
environment they do not directly support MS (of course..they are IBM..so
supporting MS would be like MS supporting IBM..sorry I giggled there).
However, "they will do all they can to help you use their product to
restore your environment. Above that your almost on your own as far as
being stuck in the MS mud.

As for Veritas..I have talked directly to high-end techs at the TECH ED
conferences and they say that veritas can do mailbox restores (or what
THEY call brick level). However, it is NOT message level capable. So
when you restore a mailbox? Your actually restoring the ENTIRE mailbox,
over-writing the new mail if you chose restore to original
location....There are only 2 or 3 companies who have a DBAgent that will
open these E2K DB's and allow you message level restores, and THAT is
true Brick Level capable. Though I am not recommending this company, as
they have poor support, and will drive you nuts trying to get
anywhere...We use BrightStore v9. coupled with E2K ability to do deleted
item retention, which we set for 30 days. Then we use Brighstore to do
bi-weekly full backup of the bricks separately from the regular backup.
We are able to pinpoint any message or folder with-in a two year time
period, so long as the user knows when they deleted it. As for DR? we
have determined that due to the time and money it takes to build a new
separate server instance for anyone/department who wants a mailbox or
message back, is too labor intensive.

I have heard that a company call Comm-vault backsup like veritas, but
has the option of an agent that can open up any DB backup in E2K and
make it so that it can separate out the individuals mailbox, and do what
brightstore can do (mentioned above).

Again just my two penny's



-----Original Message-----
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU] On Behalf Of
Remeta, Mark
Sent: Monday, March 15, 2004 2:57 PM
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Subject: Re: veritas backup exec client and TSM server

No it doesn't. I'm just telling you from experience that when your using
software from two different companies that are suppose to work together,
you
always have a lot of finger pointing going on. It makes getting support
much
more difficult. One is always saying it's the others fault. Add on to
that
that the whole thing is not supported by Microsoft and you have a real
disaster waiting to happen. If you do decide to go this route I would
perform test restores as often as possible to make sure it works!
There's
nothing worse than not being able to restore what you thought you were
backing up.

Mark


-----Original Message-----
From: Remco Post [mailto:r.post AT SARA DOT NL]
Sent: Monday, March 15, 2004 2:26 PM
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Subject: Re: veritas backup exec client and TSM server


>ok, that assumes that veritas is less able to support their product
than
IBM
>is. Since Veritas is a _big_ player in the back-up market, I'm not
ready to
>do so just yet. Remember, this is a product in use by at least as may
>organisations as TSM is, and it wouldn't be if people can't rely on the
>quality of the product.
>
>Any argument as in 'if the software is upgraded, we need to upgrade the
>client', only means exactly that. With win2003 this was true, so why
not
>with a mail database? I don't see the problem. _My_ problem is that my
users
>are asking for a functionality that I'm currently unable to provide,
unless
>I do unconventional things. Since SARA is more or less in the buisiness
of
>doing unconventional things (like running TSM!) this should be no
shock....

Confidentiality Note: The information transmitted is intended only for
the
person or entity to whom or which it is addressed and may contain
confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission,
dissemination or other use of this information by persons or entities
other
than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you receive this in error,
please delete this material immediately.