In the "Client-acceptor scheduler services versus the traditional scheduler
Services" section on page 225 of the
IBM Tivoli Storage Manager for Windows Backup-Archive
Clients
Version 6.4
Installation and User's Guide
It says "Generally, using the client acceptor daemon to manage the scheduler
is the preferred method."
David
-----Original Message-----
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU] On Behalf Of
Schneider, Jim
Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2013 11:07 AM
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] DSMCAD deprecated?!?
Nick,
The 6.2 Windows Backup/Archive Installation and User's Guide, page 209, says
dsmcad is the preferred scheduling method. Also, Tivoli Storage Manager
traditional scheduler services "Requires higher use of system resources when
idle" and "Restart the traditional scheduler periodically to free system
resources previously used by system calls."
The scheduler service has a memory leak. It is unlikely that DSMCAD is
deprecated.
Jim Schneider
-----Original Message-----
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU] On Behalf Of
Nick Laflamme
Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2013 9:28 AM
To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
Subject: [ADSM-L] DSMCAD deprecated?!?
A colleague insists that TSM service once told him that DSMCAD would be
deprecated and that we need to convert to using the TSM Scheduler routinely.
The TSM 6.3 client manuals, however, refer to both techniques as valid choices.
Has anyone ever been told by IBM that DSMCAD had been or will be deprecated,
either in general or in very specific cases?
Alternately, can anyone point to current IBM recommendations in favor of DSMCAD?
Thanks,
Nick
**********************************************************************
Information contained in this e-mail message and in any attachments thereto is
confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this
message, delete any copies held on your systems, notify the sender immediately,
and refrain from using or disclosing all or any part of its content to any
other person.
|