Re: Subfile backups (or Adaptive Copy)
What are all of the postst referring to with regard to a base file backup on the 32 iteration of subfile backups -Original Message- From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Krzysztof WOZNIAK Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 10:24 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Subfile backups (or Adaptive Copy) -Original Message- From: Prather, Wanda [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 16 October 2003 4:09 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Subfile backups (or Adaptive Copy) snip Is there a method for checking beforehand whether the current backup session is going to be a base or a meta backup? This info would be used to prevent - or at least warn the user to not to use diap-up lines for huge backup sessions. Not an issue - it's not the SESSION that is a base or meta backup, it's at the FILE level. Only the particular FILE that has changed enough since the base backup will start a new base. So it probably won't matter to most users if a few files require a new base. The only thing I know of that will cause the entire session to be a base backup, is deleting the /baclient/cache subdirectory. Base is file-related! This is a bit of understading which I missed. Thank you very much for this explanation It was very helpul. Regards, -- Mr Krzysztof Wozniak,-_|\ E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Edith Cowan University / \ Phone: 61-8-9273 8026 Churchlands WA, 6018 $_,-._/Fax: 61-8-9273 8000 Australia o
Re: Subfile backups (or Adaptive Copy)
-Original Message- From: Prather, Wanda [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 16 October 2003 4:09 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Subfile backups (or Adaptive Copy) snip Is there a method for checking beforehand whether the current backup session is going to be a base or a meta backup? This info would be used to prevent - or at least warn the user to not to use diap-up lines for huge backup sessions. Not an issue - it's not the SESSION that is a base or meta backup, it's at the FILE level. Only the particular FILE that has changed enough since the base backup will start a new base. So it probably won't matter to most users if a few files require a new base. The only thing I know of that will cause the entire session to be a base backup, is deleting the /baclient/cache subdirectory. Base is file-related! This is a bit of understading which I missed. Thank you very much for this explanation It was very helpul. Regards, -- Mr Krzysztof Wozniak,-_|\ E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Edith Cowan University / \ Phone: 61-8-9273 8026 Churchlands WA, 6018 $_,-._/Fax: 61-8-9273 8000 Australia o
Re: Subfile backups (or Adaptive Copy)
It's a good thing. You can just turn it on and use it with the defaults and get a lot of benefit. Or you can use include (or exclude).subfile to use it just for a group of files - works great on those nasty, ever-expanding .pst files. It creates a \baclient\cache subdirectory - REMEMBER TO EXCLUDE that subdirectory from your client backups! -Original Message- From: Rowan O'Donoghue [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2003 11:31 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Subfile backups (or Adaptive Copy) All, Have a customer looking at subfile backups for two webservers which are hosted at a remote hosting facility and connected via a WAN. We are looking at using subfile backups to enable these servers to participate within the TSM hierarchy, but I want to get a feel of real-world-experiences from people who are actually using it in production at the moment. What have been your main issues? (apart from the obvious being expanded TSM processing time on the client, and slow restores). Also, how have you sized the subfile cache area? Was there a rule of thumb for this sizing? thanks! Rowan.
Re: Subfile backups (or Adaptive Copy)
snip Is there a method for checking beforehand whether the current backup session is going to be a base or a meta backup? This info would be used to prevent - or at least warn the user to not to use diap-up lines for huge backup sessions. Not an issue - it's not the SESSION that is a base or meta backup, it's at the FILE level. Only the particular FILE that has changed enough since the base backup will start a new base. So it probably won't matter to most users if a few files require a new base. The only thing I know of that will cause the entire session to be a base backup, is deleting the /baclient/cache subdirectory.
Subfile backups (or Adaptive Copy)
All, Have a customer looking at subfile backups for two webservers which are hosted at a remote hosting facility and connected via a WAN. We are looking at using subfile backups to enable these servers to participate within the TSM hierarchy, but I want to get a feel of real-world-experiences from people who are actually using it in production at the moment. What have been your main issues? (apart from the obvious being expanded TSM processing time on the client, and slow restores). Also, how have you sized the subfile cache area? Was there a rule of thumb for this sizing? thanks! Rowan.
AW: Subfile backups (or Adaptive Copy)
I tested it on couple of file servers, it worked like a breeze, but at the last I was definitely limited by it´s limits (grr, my wording in not worth to loose a word about) namely subfile cache area - which is 1 GB as far as I can remember, anyway, far too small to keep all delta files dictated by my file servers in question. I ended in purchasing extra bandwidth and performing regular forever incremental. I still have got a very small client location where subfile backup simply works and works - no troubles at all so far. Another point to watch is that regulary, I believe after each 32 subsequent subfile backups, full file size will be transfered once again. regards juraj salak -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: Rowan O'Donoghue [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Gesendet: Dienstag, 14. Oktober 2003 17:31 An: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Betreff: Subfile backups (or Adaptive Copy) All, Have a customer looking at subfile backups for two webservers which are hosted at a remote hosting facility and connected via a WAN. We are looking at using subfile backups to enable these servers to participate within the TSM hierarchy, but I want to get a feel of real-world-experiences from people who are actually using it in production at the moment. What have been your main issues? (apart from the obvious being expanded TSM processing time on the client, and slow restores). Also, how have you sized the subfile cache area? Was there a rule of thumb for this sizing? thanks! Rowan.
Re: AW: Subfile backups (or Adaptive Copy)
Interesting to note about the transfer of the full file after the 32 subfile backups - does this definitely happen? You mention that 1GB was used as the subfile cache area...how big was the amount of space available on the server? I believe that the TSM client does not perform housekeeping on this directory (i.e. it does not clean out old binary images) and you have to do this yourself. thanks, Rowan. Salak Juraj [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED] 14/10/2003 16:55 Please respond to ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED] To [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc Subject AW: Subfile backups (or Adaptive Copy) I tested it on couple of file servers, it worked like a breeze, but at the last I was definitely limited by it´s limits (grr, my wording in not worth to loose a word about) namely subfile cache area - which is 1 GB as far as I can remember, anyway, far too small to keep all delta files dictated by my file servers in question. I ended in purchasing extra bandwidth and performing regular forever incremental. I still have got a very small client location where subfile backup simply works and works - no troubles at all so far. Another point to watch is that regulary, I believe after each 32 subsequent subfile backups, full file size will be transfered once again. regards juraj salak -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: Rowan O'Donoghue [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Gesendet: Dienstag, 14. Oktober 2003 17:31 An: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Betreff: Subfile backups (or Adaptive Copy) All, Have a customer looking at subfile backups for two webservers which are hosted at a remote hosting facility and connected via a WAN. We are looking at using subfile backups to enable these servers to participate within the TSM hierarchy, but I want to get a feel of real-world-experiences from people who are actually using it in production at the moment. What have been your main issues? (apart from the obvious being expanded TSM processing time on the client, and slow restores). Also, how have you sized the subfile cache area? Was there a rule of thumb for this sizing? thanks! Rowan. ForwardSourceID:NT00019F26
Re: AW: Subfile backups (or Adaptive Copy)
Unless there was a change recently, TSM does not send a full after 32 subfile backups. See http://msgs.adsm.org/cgi-bin/get/adsm0208/898.html for when a new base file is sent. Tim Rushforth City of Winnipeg -Original Message- From: Rowan O'Donoghue [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: October 14, 2003 11:18 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: AW: Subfile backups (or Adaptive Copy) Interesting to note about the transfer of the full file after the 32 subfile backups - does this definitely happen? You mention that 1GB was used as the subfile cache area...how big was the amount of space available on the server? I believe that the TSM client does not perform housekeeping on this directory (i.e. it does not clean out old binary images) and you have to do this yourself. thanks, Rowan. Salak Juraj [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED] 14/10/2003 16:55 Please respond to ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED] To [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc Subject AW: Subfile backups (or Adaptive Copy) I tested it on couple of file servers, it worked like a breeze, but at the last I was definitely limited by it´s limits (grr, my wording in not worth to loose a word about) namely subfile cache area - which is 1 GB as far as I can remember, anyway, far too small to keep all delta files dictated by my file servers in question. I ended in purchasing extra bandwidth and performing regular forever incremental. I still have got a very small client location where subfile backup simply works and works - no troubles at all so far. Another point to watch is that regulary, I believe after each 32 subsequent subfile backups, full file size will be transfered once again. regards juraj salak -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: Rowan O'Donoghue [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Gesendet: Dienstag, 14. Oktober 2003 17:31 An: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Betreff: Subfile backups (or Adaptive Copy) All, Have a customer looking at subfile backups for two webservers which are hosted at a remote hosting facility and connected via a WAN. We are looking at using subfile backups to enable these servers to participate within the TSM hierarchy, but I want to get a feel of real-world-experiences from people who are actually using it in production at the moment. What have been your main issues? (apart from the obvious being expanded TSM processing time on the client, and slow restores). Also, how have you sized the subfile cache area? Was there a rule of thumb for this sizing? thanks! Rowan. ForwardSourceID:NT00019F26
AW: AW: Subfile backups (or Adaptive Copy)
1 GB is an TSM limit, there was substantially more free space on those servers, over 5 GB. Housekeeping: I strongly believe you should not do housekeeping there - this must be the place wher tsm client saves deltas from previous backups so that it can compute delta to most current file version without having to retrieve last but one version first. This issue with 32 versions - well, I am not sure - I read it on the forum and for me it looked like it was true, because occasionaly the backups consumed more bandwdth as I expected. But it could be that overruned subfile chace directory was the reason, I am not quite sure. regards Juraj Salak -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: Rowan O'Donoghue [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Gesendet: Dienstag, 14. Oktober 2003 18:18 An: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Betreff: Re: AW: Subfile backups (or Adaptive Copy) Interesting to note about the transfer of the full file after the 32 subfile backups - does this definitely happen? You mention that 1GB was used as the subfile cache area...how big was the amount of space available on the server? I believe that the TSM client does not perform housekeeping on this directory (i.e. it does not clean out old binary images) and you have to do this yourself. thanks, Rowan. Salak Juraj [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED] 14/10/2003 16:55 Please respond to ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED] To [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc Subject AW: Subfile backups (or Adaptive Copy) I tested it on couple of file servers, it worked like a breeze, but at the last I was definitely limited by it´s limits (grr, my wording in not worth to loose a word about) namely subfile cache area - which is 1 GB as far as I can remember, anyway, far too small to keep all delta files dictated by my file servers in question. I ended in purchasing extra bandwidth and performing regular forever incremental. I still have got a very small client location where subfile backup simply works and works - no troubles at all so far. Another point to watch is that regulary, I believe after each 32 subsequent subfile backups, full file size will be transfered once again. regards juraj salak -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: Rowan O'Donoghue [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Gesendet: Dienstag, 14. Oktober 2003 17:31 An: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Betreff: Subfile backups (or Adaptive Copy) All, Have a customer looking at subfile backups for two webservers which are hosted at a remote hosting facility and connected via a WAN. We are looking at using subfile backups to enable these servers to participate within the TSM hierarchy, but I want to get a feel of real-world-experiences from people who are actually using it in production at the moment. What have been your main issues? (apart from the obvious being expanded TSM processing time on the client, and slow restores). Also, how have you sized the subfile cache area? Was there a rule of thumb for this sizing? thanks! Rowan. ForwardSourceID:NT00019F26
Re: Subfile backups (or Adaptive Copy)
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Rowan O'Donoghue [EMAIL PROTECTED] says: All, Have a customer looking at subfile backups for two webservers which are hosted at a remote hosting facility and connected via a WAN. What have been your main issues? (apart from the obvious being expanded TSM processing time on the client, and slow restores). We have not found an issue with the processing on the clients as most newer pc's a fast and not used anywhere near 100% during off hours when we are doing backups. Now the network is a different issue. You can find a number of past comments on this subject. Even some from IBM talking a little bit about how it works. Our number one issue is that we have folks with greater then 2gig files and TSM only does subfile backups on files less then 2gig in size. The IBM folks gave the rules for when a new regular backup was used. One reason was when the delta increased to x % of the whole file. If you use this feature you should install the latest hot fix as there is a fix for subfile restores when the combined size of the base and delta exceed 2 gig. Also, how have you sized the subfile cache area? Was there a rule of thumb for this sizing? We sized the cache for the max size. Note I believe that this does not hold the delta's but the checksums for the blocks that make up the files. Rowan. It looks like a number of other vendors are using incr forever and block level backups. len
Re: Subfile backups (or Adaptive Copy)
-Original Message- From: Salak Juraj [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, 14 October 2003 11:56 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: AW: Subfile backups (or Adaptive Copy) I tested it on couple of file servers, it worked like a breeze, but at the last I was definitely limited by it´s limits (grr, my wording in not worth to loose a word about) namely subfile cache area - which is 1 GB as far as I can remember, anyway, far too small to keep all delta files dictated by my file servers in question. I ended in purchasing extra bandwidth and performing regular forever incremental. I still have got a very small client location where subfile backup simply works and works - no troubles at all so far. Another point to watch is that regulary, I believe after each 32 subsequent subfile backups, full file size will be transfered once again. regards juraj salak I've just attended the TSM Implementation course. The number of deltas was quoted to be only 20. Can this number be modified? I intend to use adaptive backup to backup user data on the flock of PCs and Apples. The users may use either dial-up lines or LAN. Is there a method for checking beforehand whether the current backup session is going to be a base or a meta backup? This info would be used to prevent - or at least warn the user to not to use diap-up lines for huge backup sessions. With regards, -- Mr Krzysztof Wozniak,-_|\ E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Edith Cowan University / \ Phone: 61-8-9273 8026 Churchlands WA, 6018 $_,-._/Fax: 61-8-9273 8000 Australia o -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: Rowan O'Donoghue [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Gesendet: Dienstag, 14. Oktober 2003 17:31 An: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Betreff: Subfile backups (or Adaptive Copy) All, Have a customer looking at subfile backups for two webservers which are hosted at a remote hosting facility and connected via a WAN. We are looking at using subfile backups to enable these servers to participate within the TSM hierarchy, but I want to get a feel of real-world-experiences from people who are actually using it in production at the moment. What have been your main issues? (apart from the obvious being expanded TSM processing time on the client, and slow restores). Also, how have you sized the subfile cache area? Was there a rule of thumb for this sizing? thanks! Rowan.
