On Tue, Oct 30, 2001 at 11:24:24AM -0600, George Lesho wrote:
> Suad, Have you considered a strategy where you give the desktops access to
> network drives on a "few" servers that would be backed up incrementally?
> Trying to back up hundreds of desktops in a small window is a bunch more
> resourc
On Tue, Oct 30, 2001 at 12:45:55PM -0500, Prather, Wanda wrote:
> I think backing up desktops is a good thing, but I wonder why are you
> backing up the System Object if you are only backing up the documents
> directories? How could you restore the System Objects if you don't also
> back up/resto
From: George Lesho [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2001 12:24 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Server->Server Virtual Volumes (philosophical)
Suad, Have you considered a strategy where you give the desktops access to
network drives on a "few" servers that
ROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:(bcc: George Lesho/Partners/AFC)
Fax to:
Subject: Server->Server Virtual Volumes (philosophical)
Sorry, this got a bit long winded..
Our monolith TSM installation is suffering from client overload,
specifically
hundreds of desktops queueing to be ba
Sorry, this got a bit long winded..
Our monolith TSM installation is suffering from client overload, specifically
hundreds of desktops queueing to be backed up every morning (we only give a 4 hour
window to desktops after servers have finished).
Several times this month some glitches with our tap
