On Friday 17 September 2010, you wrote:
> From the few responses I got about 6.1.4.x vs 6.2.1.1 for a new server,
> the responses leaned to 6.2.x.
>
> With that decision made, the next is laying out the structure of storage
> pools and such.
>
> Most discussions/directions from here/IBM say that D
>Also, do you have a (fast) DISK based volume in front of the FILE storage
>pool? We do this >so we can allow lots of client backups coming in and use
>the number of migration processes >to control the data streams to the FILE
>storage pool.
Yes, I had DISK pools before, but I have migrated al
De performance of a disk based storagepool will be fine at the start but will
degrade over time due to fragmentation, I have seen this happen on large
permanent use diskpools.
I would advise only using DISK based storagepools for temporary storage (soon
to be migrated) or for situations were pe
On Sep 22, 2010, at 7:17 AM, Stefan Folkerts wrote:
> De performance of a disk based storagepool will be fine at the start but will
> degrade over time due to fragmentation, I have seen this happen on large
> permanent use diskpools.
I think this is particularly an issue with TSM volumes implem
Hi Everyone,
Does anyone have the ftp site for the 6.2.2 client?
Thanks!
This e-mail and any attachments to it are confidential and are intended solely
for use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have
received this e-mail in error, pl
I don't see it on service.boulder.ibm.com
I found the 6.2.1.0 base under "maintenance" and 6.2.1.2 (for Windows)
under "patches" but no 6.2.2
Why do you think it is out/available?
From:
"Moyer, Joni M"
To:
ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Date:
09/22/2010 09:49 AM
Subject:
[ADSM-L] TSM Windows x32 6.2.2
On Friday 17 September 2010, Stef Coene wrote:
> When we changed the FILE based storage pool to 5 GB volumes, the result was
much better. There was less reclamation needed because it is less likely that
a volume has a status Filling.
Interesting concept Stef...just the opposite of what I did to
Hello,
the 6.2.2.0 client is not available on the ftp site yet.
The target for the 6.2.2.0 client is December 2010.
Keep in mind that the target is subject to change at IBM's discretion.
You can find the TSM Schedule for Fix-Packs on our Wiki site here :
http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/wikis/dis
Would someone please send me the default includes / excludes for a win 2008
system? Or, tell me how to guide someone to get them added to their dsm.opt?
I can't get at it, the dsm gui doesn't work with screen readers at all.
Darn java.
Gary Lee
Senior System Programmer
Ball State University
phon
On Wednesday 22 September 2010, you wrote:
> On Friday 17 September 2010, Stef Coene wrote:
> > When we changed the FILE based storage pool to 5 GB volumes, the result
> > was
>
> much better. There was less reclamation needed because it is less likely
> that a volume has a status Filling.
>
>
> I
I thought it was available because support told me to upgrade a windows 2008
client to that release. It looks like it's not available until 12/10.
-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ads...@vm.marist.edu] On Behalf Of Zoltan
Forray/AC/VCU
Sent: Wednesday, September
My idea was to create volumes large enough to hold all or large portions of
entire files of this size. I haven't been doing this long enough for mass
expirations to take effect yet so I don't know for sure how it's going to turn
out.
I don't use any diskpool buffer. I send data straight to a D
Very interesting discussions about FILE devclass and configuration
whoas..lots of guess-work and differing opinions. Sounds like FILE
adds another level of administrations (reclaims?) and not sure if it will
really benefit me.
Now I am not sure if this is the right way to go. Maybe I should
If your active policy set is OK, then copy po active
. Then activate po
and you're back in sync.
Joerg Pohlmann
250-585-3711
-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ads...@vm.marist.edu] On Behalf Of
Richard Rhodes
Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2010 10:55
To: ADSM-L@VM.
Here is a good start of a Default Incl/Excl for Windows Server 2008
Exclude "*:\Users\...\temp\*"
Exclude "*:\Users\...\UsrClass.dat"
Exclude "*:\Users\...\UsrClass.dat.log"
Exclude "*:\...\Lastalive0.dat"
Exclude "*:\...\Lastalive1.dat"
Exclude "*:\Users\...\ntuser.dat.log"
Exclude "*:\Users\...\
I have mentioned in previous posts that we are putting up 2-new RH Linux
based TSM server . These are the first of my existing 5-Linux servers to
use EMC SAN storage.
With every new adventure, we get new problems. This one is driving
everyone crazy and hope someone out there can point us in the r
Hello all,
We have been having a issue with a Windows 2008 Cluster setup for about
5 nights. All the backups run except the cluster backup ("SSENT-B-CLUSTER")
no errors
the backups schedules without error
but the backup never kicks off. nothing happens
on the tsm server it looks like it creates
Have you check dsmwebcl.log for the cluster?
That will tell you whether the acceptor started correctly.
Gary Lee
Senior System Programmer
Ball State University
phone: 765-285-1310
-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ads...@vm.marist.edu] On Behalf Of
Timothy H
I see your "exclude" statements below. I do not see any "include" statements.
Do you include the directories for your SQL data? If you perform a backup
command manually does it work as expected?
Ray
-Original Message-
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ads...@vm.marist.edu] On Behalf
There is a "by-id" section in the IBM Tape device driver installation and user
guide (for LTO). Looks like it hooks into the RHEL udev stuff.
I would personally try to find the same guide for TS1120 and send you a link,
but I'm fighting an EDL problem at the moment.
Thanks,
[RC]
On Sep 22, 2
The Exclude statement are wrong spelled.
You need to type
DOMAIN E:
EXCLUDE "E:\...\Northwind\...\*"
EXCLUDE "E:\...\pubs\...\*"
EXCLUDE "E:\...\master\...\*"
Best Regards
Christian Svensson
Cell: +46-70-325 1577
E-mail: christian.svens...@cristie.se
Skype: cristie.christian.svensson
Supported
21 matches
Mail list logo
