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:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Remeta, Mark Sent: Monday, March 15, 2004 2:57 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 15, 2004 2:26 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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.
