In fact what matters most here is that i have been backing up another server which has more than 20 GB of available space on C drive and upon snapshotcache of D on C, causes the system to hang until hard booted.
Q1- Why this snapshot is of so big size? Q2- Keeping the nodename same, how can i schedule incremental backup which would use 2nd option file? For ex. dsm.opt would run the backup of C drive with its specific include/excludes and dsm-d.opt would run backup of D with its specific include/exclude. Kind REgards, Sadat Farren Minns wrote: > OK, to all > > Regarding the move to unicode file spaces. Is this something that people > are doing (have done), as a matter of course or just if the need arises. > For me this is the first time I have come across the problem of some files > not backing up correctly and I'm a little loath to now be faced with > backing up our entire client base again. > > What are your thoughts > > Farren > |-----------------------------+-------------------------------------------| > | Richard Sims <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | > | > | Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor | | > | Manager" | To| > | <ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU> | [EMAIL PROTECTED]| > | | T.EDU | > | 25/11/2005 15:36 | cc| > | | | > | Please respond to | Subject| > | "ADSM: Dist Stor | Re: [ADSM-L] | > | Manager" | exclude | > | <ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU> | directory | > | | structure | > | | | > | | | > | | | > | | | > | | | > | | | > |-----------------------------+-------------------------------------------| > > I see...you are attempting a compensation for the snapshot > requirements issue. > > I would recommend stepping back and looking at the big picture, > afresh: avoid "digging a deeper hole" in this scenario. In > particular, a modern computer which has less than 5 GB of available > disk space is ridiculously in need of either housekeeping or disk > upgrade, where the latter can be internal, external peripheral, or > networked disk space - which is to say that there are many > opportunities. The client owner should consider that the running disk > may be of considerable age now, and may be worth replacing with a > much more capacious disk, which will avoid all the problems involved > should the old disk suddenly die - particularly as it sounds like > there is not a complete backup now for that disk. Or, the Windows > computer may be so old that it is worth wholly replacing. You are, in > effect, being mired in a problem which really belongs to the client > owner. If you find no cooperation there, consider pursuing > conventional Incremental backup, dealing with open files via retries > or software subsystem shutdown during the backup, depending upon > what's keeping them open. > > Richard Sims > > On Nov 25, 2005, at 8:47 AM, Sandra wrote: > > > Dear richard, > > I m alittle confused. > > > > I will create a .bat file which will take incremental backup of 1 > > drive: > > dsmc -optfile=dsm.opt incremental -filesonly > > > > and the other .bat file would backup D drive: > > dsmc -optfile=dsm-d.opt incremental -filesonly > > > > I m doing this because i have less amount of HDD space 5GB on C and > > open files snapshot is taking tooo much space and then the system > > hangs. > > ###################################################################### > The information contained in this e-mail and any subsequent > correspondence is private and confidential and intended solely > for the named recipient(s). If you are not a named recipient, > you must not copy, distribute, or disseminate the information, > open any attachment, or take any action in reliance on it. If you > have received the e-mail in error, please notify the sender and delete > the e-mail. > > Any views or opinions expressed in this e-mail are those of the > individual sender, unless otherwise stated. Although this e-mail has > been scanned for viruses you should rely on your own virus check, as > the sender accepts no liability for any damage arising out of any bug > or virus infection. > ######################################################################
