Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[ADSM\-L\]\s+SQL\s+2012\s+AlwaysOn\s+database\s+backup\/restore\s+using\s+TDP\s+7\.1\.1\s+under\s+a\s+single\s+nodename\?\s*$/: 165981 ]

Total 165981 documents matching your query.

161. Re: [ADSM-L] Windows and symbolic links (score: 1)
Author: George Huebschman <george.huebschman AT PNC DOT COM>
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2015 12:24:25 -0400
"Access Denied" sounds like a permission or authentication error somewhere. George Huebschman (George H.) The TSM Scheduler service is running under an account that has permission to the share as wel
/usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2015-08/msg00048.html (13,302 bytes)

162. Re: [ADSM-L] Windows and symbolic links (score: 1)
Author: Bill Boyer <bjdboyer AT COMCAST DOT NET>
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2015 12:54:27 -0400
The share on the NAS device as well as the directory/files all have that user as read permission. And that's the userid the service is configured with. "Access Denied" sounds like a permission or aut
/usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2015-08/msg00049.html (13,793 bytes)

163. Re: [ADSM-L] Windows and symbolic links (score: 1)
Author: George Huebschman <george.huebschman AT PNC DOT COM>
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2015 13:54:49 -0400
How about trying a test with an opt file targeted on just that UNC name? Or try (maybe you already have) try mapping a drive to that share directly rather than as a symbolic link on the drive. George
/usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2015-08/msg00050.html (12,788 bytes)

164. [ADSM-L] TDP Node Replication - active only (score: 1)
Author: "Nixon, Charles D. (David)" <cdnixon AT CARILIONCLINIC DOT ORG>
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2015 20:28:33 +0000
We have been using node replication for a couple years now with out a problem on 6.3.x. We only replicate active data. Two weeks ago we upgraded our destination system to 7.1.1.100 and last week one
/usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2015-08/msg00051.html (12,603 bytes)

165. Re: [ADSM-L] Policy Domains and Config Management (score: 1)
Author: Henrik Ahlgren <pablo AT SEESTIETO DOT COM>
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2015 15:30:49 +0300
Have you tried creating the domain with a different name? I've observed the same behavior with older TSM server versions, too. It's quite confusing, and the admin guide lacks detail on how this shoul
/usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2015-08/msg00052.html (12,420 bytes)

166. Re: [ADSM-L] Different management class (score: 1)
Author: Henrik Ahlgren <pablo AT SEESTIETO DOT COM>
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2015 15:43:33 +0300
No need to do that. MOVE NODEDATA can be used to move the backups from one storagepool to another.
/usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2015-08/msg00053.html (11,498 bytes)

167. Re: [ADSM-L] Re: Different management class (score: 1)
Author: David Bronder <david-bronder AT UIOWA DOT EDU>
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2015 08:52:46 -0500
What that won't do, though, is move _only_ the .pst files. The smallest granularity for MOVE NODEDATA is an entire filespace. I don't think there is an actual full solution for this situation; you ha
/usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2015-08/msg00054.html (12,486 bytes)

168. [ADSM-L] mismatch capacity (score: 1)
Author: Robert Ouzen <rouzen AT UNIV.HAIFA.AC DOT IL>
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2015 09:19:19 +0000
H I to all I wanted to know for a specific nodename the amount of data backup on a specific stgpool Here the script: tsm: ADSM2>select sum(logical_mb) / 1024 as "Capacity of Data" from occupancy wher
/usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2015-08/msg00055.html (13,618 bytes)

169. Re: [ADSM-L] mismatch capacity (score: 1)
Author: Erwann SIMON <erwann.simon AT FREE DOT FR>
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2015 12:42:44 +0200
Hello Robert, As your storage pools are configured for deduplication, you have to choose the reporting_mb column (and not logical_mb) in order to have the same statistics with Q OCC ans SELECT FROM O
/usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2015-08/msg00056.html (14,223 bytes)

170. Re: [ADSM-L] mismatch capacity (score: 1)
Author: Robert Ouzen <rouzen AT UNIV.HAIFA.AC DOT IL>
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2015 10:48:28 +0000
Hello Erwann Thanks I completely forgot ! Best Regards Robert Hello Robert, As your storage pools are configured for deduplication, you have to choose the reporting_mb column (and not logical_mb) in
/usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2015-08/msg00057.html (14,680 bytes)

171. Re: [ADSM-L] Enhancement request (score: 1)
Author: "Lee, Gary" <glee AT BSU DOT EDU>
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2015 14:02:10 +0000
I just voted for it. I nearly always have at least three admin client windows open. Being totally blind, the command-line stuff is very screen reader friendly. I hate java GUIs in all their forms Hi
/usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2015-08/msg00058.html (16,629 bytes)

172. Re: [ADSM-L] Enhancement request (score: 1)
Author: "Baker, Jane" <Jane.Baker AT CLARKS DOT COM>
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2015 14:33:04 +0000
Are there any plans to include more info on tape drive usage, throughputs etc by node to identify bottlenecks? Also, to include DRM into the reporting functions for offsite vaulting etc? Regards, Jan
/usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2015-08/msg00059.html (20,609 bytes)

173. [ADSM-L] Data Protection for IBM Domino (score: 1)
Author: "Loon, EJ van (ITOPT3) - KLM" <Eric-van.Loon AT KLM DOT COM>
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2015 12:59:28 +0000
Hi guys! One of my customers uses Data Protection for IBM Domino for a few years now. All mail instances are backed up daily with the domdsmc selective command. I recently discovered that old deleted
/usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2015-08/msg00060.html (13,170 bytes)

174. Re: [ADSM-L] Data Protection for IBM Domino (score: 1)
Author: Frank Ramke <ramke AT US.IBM DOT COM>
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2015 09:20:16 -0400
This topic is found under "Backup Strategies" in the book. http://www-01.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/SSGSG7_7.1.0/com.ibm.itsm.mail.dom.win.doc/concept_domcbup3.html Sample Strategies ... Full ba
/usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2015-08/msg00061.html (15,072 bytes)

175. Re: [ADSM-L] Data Protection for IBM Domino (score: 1)
Author: Frank Ramke <ramke AT US.IBM DOT COM>
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2015 09:42:30 -0400
Eric, Just noticed your question was about circular logging.... "The customer uses circular logging only for all Domino instances." With circular logging, we cannot backup transaction logs! Anyway YE
/usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2015-08/msg00062.html (15,569 bytes)

176. Re: [ADSM-L] Data Protection for IBM Domino (score: 1)
Author: "Loon, EJ van (ITOPT3) - KLM" <Eric-van.Loon AT KLM DOT COM>
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2015 14:30:05 +0000
Hi Frank! I indeed read that part of the manual, but it's all about transaction logs and the 'logged databases' whatever that means. Nothing about what your backup strategy should be when circular lo
/usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2015-08/msg00063.html (17,557 bytes)

177. Re: [ADSM-L] Data Protection for IBM Domino (score: 1)
Author: Ron Delaware <ron.delaware AT US.IBM DOT COM>
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2015 06:45:20 -0700
EJ, You haven't stated what you are attempting to accomplish. "He now asks me 'What if I run daily incrementals instead of the selectives?' I don't know if that will work, nor can I find the answer i
/usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2015-08/msg00064.html (16,003 bytes)

178. [ADSM-L] going to all random disk pool for tsm for ve (score: 1)
Author: "Lee, Gary" <glee AT BSU DOT EDU>
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2015 19:31:15 +0000
Hoping to get upgraded to tsm server 7.1.x within the next month. At that time, we are considering changing our storage strategy to all random disk pool. This because we cannot do a file level restor
/usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2015-08/msg00065.html (11,674 bytes)

179. [ADSM-L] Node replication issue (score: 1)
Author: "Vandeventer, Harold [OITS]" <Harold.Vandeventer AT KS DOT GOV>
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2015 20:01:40 +0000
I've been running node replication, TSM 6.3.4.300 on Windows, for several months. Today, one node is causing trouble. It has about 54,000 files to be deleted and after a two hour run has deleted zero
/usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2015-08/msg00066.html (11,205 bytes)

180. Re: [ADSM-L] going to all random disk pool for tsm for ve (score: 1)
Author: David Ehresman <david.ehresman AT LOUISVILLE DOT EDU>
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2015 20:12:06 +0000
Gary, TSMVE 7.1.2 makes file level restores a reality. You may want to work with them a bit before deciding if you want to go to all random disk. David Hoping to get upgraded to tsm server 7.1.x with
/usr/local/webapp/mharc-adsm.org/html/ADSM-L/2015-08/msg00067.html (12,271 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu