Re: TDP for Exchange 2000 - Where are we?
Thanks Del!
CR
_
Cris Robinson
Storage Engineering
Liberty Mutual Group
Portsmouth, New Hampshire
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: Del Hoobler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2001 10:36 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: TDP for Exchange 2000 - Where are we?
This is not correct. It is Q1... Specifically 3/30.
Thanks,
Del
Del Hoobler
IBM Corporation
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jager Frederic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>@VM.MARIST.EDU> on 02/21/2001
10:10:25 AM
Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject: Re: TDP for Exchange 2000 - Where are we?
The TDP E2k is schedulded for Q2 and is in beta test for the moment.
> -Original Message-
> From: Cris Robinson [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2001 4:02 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: TDP for Exchange 2000 - Where are we?
>
> It's been awhile since there was discussion on the rollout of the TDP
> agent
> for Exchange 2000.
>
> Any word on a release date? Del?
>
> Thanks -
> CR
>
> _
> Cris Robinson
> Storage Engineering
> Liberty Mutual Group
> Portsmouth, New Hampshire
> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> -
>
> Un courrier électronique n'engage pas son émetteur. Tout message
> susceptible de comporter un engagement doit être confirmé par un écrit
> dûment signé.
>
> An electronic message is not binding on its sender. Any message referring
> to a binding engagement must be confirmed in writing and duly signed.
>
> Ein elektronischer Brief bzw. eine elektronische Nachricht ist für den
> Absender nicht verbindlich. Jede Nachricht, welche eine Verpflichtung
> beinhaltet, muß schriftlich bestätigt und ordnungsgemäß unterzeichnet
> werden.
>
> -
>
-
Un courrier ilectronique n'engage pas son imetteur. Tout message
susceptible de comporter un engagement doit jtre confirmi par un icrit
d{ment signi.
An electronic message is not binding on its sender. Any message referring
to a binding engagement must be confirmed in writing and duly signed.
Ein elektronischer Brief bzw. eine elektronische Nachricht ist f|r den
Absender nicht verbindlich. Jede Nachricht, welche eine Verpflichtung
beinhaltet, mu_ schriftlich bestdtigt und ordnungsgemd_ unterzeichnet
werden.
-
TDP for Exchange 2000 - Where are we?
It's been awhile since there was discussion on the rollout of the TDP agent for Exchange 2000. Any word on a release date? Del? Thanks - CR _ Cris Robinson Storage Engineering Liberty Mutual Group Portsmouth, New Hampshire mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
TSM 4.1 (Win2000) restore slow over SAN
Ok, Riddle me this Batman I have TSM server 4.1 and client 4.1 running on a Win 2000 server Fibre connected to a Brocade switch which is then Fibre connected to a Hitachi 7700e. The client and server are the same machine. Why is it that TSM 4.1.1 running on windows 2000 will backup lightning fast to the Hitachi disk, about 1GB/6min, but a restore starts out as fast but quickly throttles back to about 400Kb/sec. What is holding me up on the restore? I have tried to tune everything I can with no difference in restore speed. CR __ Cris Robinson Storage Engineering Information Technology Services & Support Liberty Mutual Insurance Portsmouth, New Hampshire 603.245.4837 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: aix 3.1.0.7 client with 4.1.x server
We have to update the servers to 4.1 or at least 3.7.3.x first and then we have 30,000 client's to upgrade. Believe me it's not an impossible task but we will be running 4.1 server on NT for a good 6 months before 4.1 client will be ready for prime time. Until then we will run 3.1.0.6. We have to do some tweaking to fix the "limitations" of TSM in our environment to make it more user proof and get the product through all the red tape involved in changing client code in our environment. Just my thoughts. C ______ Cris Robinson Storage Engineering Information Technology Services & Support Liberty Mutual Insurance Portsmouth, New Hampshire 603.245.4837 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Andy Raibeck [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2000 8:54 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Re: aix 3.1.0.7 client with 4.1.x server Not only isn't it supported, but please bear in mind that 3.1 will be going out of service in January 2001 (right around the corner). I would recommend upgrading to supported software levels rather than trying to use an unsupported configuration (even if you could make it work). Best regards, Andy Andy Raibeck IBM/Tivoli Tivoli Storage Manager Client Development e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] "The only dumb question is the one that goes unasked." Is anyone backing up an AIX node using ADSM client level 3.1.0.7 to a 4.1.x TSM Server? If yes, have you done a restore. As I read the web page http://www.tivoli.com/support/storage_mgr/compatibility.html the ADSM client is "not supported"; but it doesn't say that it won't work.
Re: Exchange 2000 TDP-follow-up
I couldn't resist commenting on this subject, again! So here it goes A few months ago we were getting abit annoyed with TSM and called in some vendors to looks at their backup products. One was Veritas, who we all know, another was CommVault which was spun off from Lucent. CommVault apparently is in bed with Microsoft, and living in sin I suppose. Their strategy is windows 2000 centric and they make some bold claims about restoring individual Exchange mailboxes. I strongly suspect that they have some inside advantage with Microsoft and Tivoli is being kept at bay. Check out their claims at: http://galaxy.commvault.com/products_sub.asp?id=63 Now, with that said I must say that I did not like the CommVault database schema and their DR solution and Tivoli wised up and fixed the TSM issues we had. I strongly suspect that Microsoft has more than a "partnership" with CommVault. But I hate Microsoft anyway so judge for yourself. Good Luck - CR __ Cris Robinson Storage Engineering Information Technology Services & Support Liberty Mutual Insurance Portsmouth, New Hampshire 603.245.4837 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Del Hoobler [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2000 1:08 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Re: Exchange 2000 TDP-follow-up Mehdi, The procedure for restoring a mailbox within Exchange 2000 will be to restore the database within the Storage Group that contains the mailbox. If you are asking about brick-level backup and restore. Then no. In fact, a Microsoft Exchange project manager was asked about when the Microsoft APIs would allow this in the future... ...and his answer was there were no plans to add this to the backup and restore API. Thanks, Del Del Hoobler IBM Corporation [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Amini, Mehdi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>@VM.MARIST.EDU> on 10/03/2000 11:30:04 AM Please respond to "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: Subject: Exchange 2000 TDP-follow-up Will Exchange 2000 TDP allow for individual Mailbox restore ? Mehdi Amini ValueOptions, MIS/LAN 703-208-8754 - Voice 703-205-6879 - Fax
Re: DLT drive shows up as GENERICTAPE on TSM 3.7.3 on Windows 200 0
I found our documentation and here is what "really" happened. (Fatherhood
definitely does something to the brain.
I now completely understand my father and why he is the way he is!)
Here is our process:
We made sure that the windows 2000 option was checked in the TSM device
driver startup options.
We then uninstalled the tape devices and rebooted.
TSM loaded it's device driver at boot
W2K found the drives..
W2K requested a reboot..
All was good! ( With the exception of applying the 3.7.3.6 patch)
It's all clear to me now!
______
Cris Robinson
Backup & Recovery Engineering
Information Technology Support Services
Liberty Mutual Insurance
Portsmouth, New Hampshire
603.431.8400.54837
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: Kelly J. Lipp [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2000 3:10 PM
To: 'Robinson, Cris'
Subject:RE: DLT drive shows up as GENERICTAPE on TSM 3.7.3
on Windows 2000
I wish I had a server here so I could recreate what we did. But we
did do
it. I'll send this to Bill too. He was with me and perhaps
remembers...
Bill,
How did we disable the DLTTAPE driver on the Windows 2000 system at
the STK
Gold Lab?
Kelly J. Lipp
Storage Solutions Specialists, Inc.
PO Box 51313
Colorado Springs CO 80949-1313
(719) 531-5926
Fax: (719) 260-5991
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.storsol.com
www.storserver.com
-Original Message-
From: Robinson, Cris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2000 11:55 AM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: DLT drive shows up as GENERICTAPE on TSM 3.7.3 on
Windows
2000
Hmm?
I just went to the win 2000 server and could not disable any dlt
drivers. I
don't even show a disable option anywhere.
Was it done from the device configuration settings? I'm betting you
did
disable the
DLT driver in a place I am unaware of. I'm dying to know how ya did
it!
C
__
Cris Robinson
Backup & Recovery Engineering
Information Technology Support Services
Liberty Mutual Insurance
Portsmouth, New Hampshire
603.431.8400.54837
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> -Original Message-
> From: Kelly J. Lipp [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2000 12:22 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: DLT drive shows up as GENERICTAPE on TSM 3.7.3
on
> Windows 2000
>
> I was able to disable the DLT driver. This was in Windows 2000.
Are you
> thinking I shouldn't have been able to do this?
>
> Kelly J. Lipp
> Storage Solutions Specialists, Inc.
> PO Box 51313
> Colorado Springs CO 80949-1313
> (719) 531-5926
> Fax: (719) 260-5991
> Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> www.storsol.com
> www.storserver.com
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2000 10:12 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: DLT drive shows up as GENERICTAPE on TSM 3.7.3 on
Windows
> 2000
>
>
> another thought on this issue...
>
> Under the TSM Device Drive Options, ( TSM Server Utilities), make
sure
> that
> the box titled " Enable Windows 2000 and Optical Device Support"
is
> Checked.
>
> This will cause the TSM device driver to load at boot.
> I have found that in Windows 2000 you cannot,( or at least we
could not),
> disable or remove the Microsoft driver like you could in NT.
> Make sure you reboot after making the change. You will still see
the
> Microsoft driver but the drive should not be showing up a GENERIC
anymore.
>
> One last thing...
>
> We had to apply 3.7.3.6 to get the library to work correctly.
>
>
> Good luck -
>
> C
>
>
>
>
> __
> Cris Robinson
> Backup & Recovery Engineering
> Information Technology Support Services
> Liberty Mutual Insurance
> Portsmouth, New Hampshire
> 603.431.8400.54837
> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Re: I have a ( stupid) netware restore question
<>
Interesting. Guess it's time to upgrade!
Thanks -
CR
__
Cris Robinson
Backup & Recovery Engineering
Information Technology Support Services
Liberty Mutual Insurance
Portsmouth, New Hampshire
603.431.8400.54837
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: S W Branch [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2000 10:45 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:Re: I have a ( stupid) netware restore question
Chris,
I've seen this behavior prior to availability of the levels of
server and
client that supported long file names in Novell. It had to do with
collisions in converting the file/directory name to the DOS 8.3
format and
the order in which the files/directories were processed during the
restore.
I was hoping that this would no longer be a problem now that long
file
names are supposed to be fully supported.
Steve Branch
Phillips Petroleum
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Robinson, Cris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>@VM.MARIST.EDU> on
08/10/2000 08:41:28 AM
Any replies will be addressed to: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject: I have a ( stupid) netware restore question
Ok, I've done quite a few full Netware restores and I have noticed
that
when
I restore an entire volume, (the volume is empty when I start), I
get
messages that state that the file already exists and it is skipping.
Now I
don't mean the files that are created when the volume and name space
support
are installed. I'm talking data files several directories down. We
haven't
noticed any problems with the restores but how can this happen?
Anyone? Not worried, just perplexed as I stare at RCONSOLE. :- 0
CR
__
Cris Robinson
Backup & Recovery Engineering
Information Technology Support Services
Liberty Mutual Insurance
Portsmouth, New Hampshire
603.431.8400.54837
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: I have a ( stupid) NetWare restore question
The filenames are truncated by default on Netware (ADSM client version 3.1.0.6). We don't use the MEMORYEFFICIENTBACKUP option. Default is no. I didn't specify -LATEST as an option so it should just restore the active files which is what I want. where did I put my lava lamp? Must be in the box with my polyester shirts and bell bottom pants. C __ Cris Robinson Backup & Recovery Engineering Information Technology Support Services Liberty Mutual Insurance Portsmouth, New Hampshire 603.431.8400.54837 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Phil Bone [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2000 10:03 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Re: I have a ( stupid) NetWare restore question Could it be that your client has MEMMORYEFFICIENTBACKUP=YES and the filenames have been truncated? Or that you are restoring all versions of each file? (Just some thoughts) Oh yeah, when you get tired of staring RCONSOLE, try a Lava Lamp Phil Bone Sr. Systems Consultant Network Services, Infrastructure Management Office: 706.596.5928 Fax: 706.596.5950 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Robinson, Cris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2000 9:41 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: I have a ( stupid) netware restore question Ok, I've done quite a few full Netware restores and I have noticed that when I restore an entire volume, (the volume is empty when I start), I get messages that state that the file already exists and it is skipping. Now I don't mean the files that are created when the volume and name space support are installed. I'm talking data files several directories down. We haven't noticed any problems with the restores but how can this happen? Anyone? Not worried, just perplexed as I stare at RCONSOLE. :- 0 CR __ Cris Robinson Backup & Recovery Engineering Information Technology Support Services Liberty Mutual Insurance Portsmouth, New Hampshire 603.431.8400.54837 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 4.1 client for Windows
<< Theoretically the 4.1 client might run on an ADSM 3.1 server, but such a configuration is UNSUPPORTED. This means that if you try to run the 4.1 client with a 3.1 server, it might work, but you do so at your own risk!!! Translation: Don't do it!>> Sure, now you tell me! I have not seen a problem , yet. C ______ Cris Robinson Sr. Technical Analyst Enterprise Storage Management / TSM Liberty Mutual Insurance Portsmouth, New Hampshire 603.431.8400.54837 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Andy Raibeck [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2000 7:12 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Re: 4.1 client for Windows I'm not sure if this question was answered yet, so apologies in advance I'm retreading covered ground. The TSM 4.1 clients are supported only on TSM 3.7 and 4.1 servers. Theoretically the 4.1 client might run on an ADSM 3.1 server, but such a configuration is UNSUPPORTED. This means that if you try to run the 4.1 client with a 3.1 server, it might work, but you do so at your own risk!!! Translation: Don't do it! Regards, Andy Andy Raibeck IBM/Tivoli Tivoli Storage Manager Client Development e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] "The only dumb question is the one that goes unasked." Can I run this client if my ADSM server is still at ADSM and hasn't been moved to TSM yet ? Or is this only for environments running TSM on the server as well ? Mike
