At one time I used cumulative inc. for just about everything; however,
then the realization that is was eating up tape galore.
Would cum.incr. be more advantageous for certain situations.
I was thinking in one case a database system called DOORS. It generates
thousands of small files changing
James C Siano wrote:
Would cum.incr. be more advantageous for certain situations.
Or where
else would it be best used overall from those on the list using that
formula?
CumInc is used when you want to minimize the tape mounts for a restore and
also to minimize the risk of data loss in case
Some NetBackup admins that use diffInc will throw in a CumInc in the middle of the week. "Ed Wilts" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 8/17/2006 7:43 AM
James C Siano wrote: Would cum.incr. be more advantageous for certain situations. Or where else would it be best used overall from those on the list using that
