TSM can give very quick restores, but beware fragmentation in uncollocated tape pools. We had to rebuild a small (350GB) unix server last year that required upward of 300 tape mounts, and finding a single file in the middle of each tape. It took days.
Since then I have gotten funding to buy enough tapes for collocation, and last week at 200GB restore took about 45 minutes. - Kai. > -----Original Message----- > From: Joni Moyer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, 05 March 2003 7:21 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: progressive backup vs. full + incremental > > > ---------------------- Information from the mail header > ----------------------- > Sender: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Poster: Joni Moyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: progressive backup vs. full + incremental > -------------------------------------------------------------- > ----------------- > > Hello everyone! > > I was wondering why the full + incremental would result in a > longer restore > time than the progressive backup methodology? From several co-workers > point of view they thought that it would be quicker on the full + > incremental because you wouldn't have to go back to the > beginning backups > of the file and restore all of the incrementals, you would > just go back to > the most recent full backup and apply the incrementals after > that point. > When I went to explain the reasoning behind this, I had some problems > understanding the concept myself, so I was hoping someone > could explain > both methods and why they differ in restore time and why > progressive is > better than the full + incremental. Thank you so much for > any help you can > lend on this matter! > > > > Joni Moyer > Systems Programmer > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > (717)975-8338 >
