Wanda, thanks for the info.
I was aware of this feature so I am staying on 4.1.1.16 where 'system objects'
is not in the default domain. For each w2k machine I make an additional
schedule to back up 'system objects' every 4 weeks.
I wonder what is the difference between backing up these files thru the normal
backup of the C drive and backing them up as part of 'system objects'. Put
another way, what necessary data or meta-data is added by using the system objects
path. This is probably more a question about the win2k system than about tsm.
--
--------------------------
Bill Colwell
C. S. Draper Lab
Cambridge, Ma.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 06/01/01
at 04:56 PM, "Prather, Wanda" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>I have run into some ugly issues with the Win2K backup of the "SYSTEM
>OBJECT".
>I'm throwing the information out here to warn other people what to expect,
>and hopefully to get the developers to reconsider the current
>implementation.
>The SYSTEM FILES component of the "SYSTEM OBJECT" on Win2K consists of over
>1500 .dll and .exe and .obj files from (mostly) the WinNT/system32
>directory. These files are backed up EVERY TIME an incremental is run, even
>though THE DATA HAS NOT CHANGED.
>We have converted over 200 NT desktops to WIn2K PRO. For each of our Win2K
>PRO systems, this adds 1586 files to the backup every night.
>This has had an enormous impact on the TSM server. The additional data is
>only about 20 GB per night, and that's not a big problem. But each of the
>SYSTEM FILES still has it's own entry in the TSM data base.
>You do the math: That's over 300,000 additional objects that get added AND
>deactivated each day, which for me means an additional 2.5 HOURS of EXPIRE
>INVENTORY time is needed DAILY. And all for data THAT HAS NOT CHANGED.
>TSM's strength has always been that it DOESN"T back up unchanged data.
>Well, at least it didn't used to...
>My problem here is we have another 250 machines to convert from NT to WIn2K.
>They aren't about to buy me a second TSM server to handle the load, when the
>current one worked fine for backing up the same number of NT systems with
>the same amount of user data. Instead they are looking at some Windows-only
>software to back up the WIndows side of the house.
>It appears to me the current TSM implementation is flawed, and will inhibit
>other people's ability to support large Windows environments as well as
>ours.
>I put this information into the Requirements for the Oxford Symposium,
>hopefully it will give some additional visibility to the issue.
>Any suggestions welcome ....but don't suggest we give up our ability to do
>full bare-metal restores.
>Management will change the backup software first.
>************************************************************************
>Wanda Prather
>The Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Lab
>443-778-8769
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>"Intelligence has much less practical application than you'd think" -
>Scott Adams/Dilbert
>************************************************************************
