|
Oh yeah...TIR
I've seen the error message in the "all log reports" that complains about the TIR folder and then states that since there is a problem with the TIR folder that it will do a FULL backup :-(
>>> Wayne T Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 8/16/2006 4:27 PM >>> We've seen the much larger than expected cumulative incremental on
several machines, and not limited to Windows. For each one that I've tried, putting them in a policy that does *not* collect TIR information works around the problem (v5.1). I'll pass on the "images nearing expiration and with no copy 2" question. cheers, wayne Veritas Netbackup wrote, in part, on 8/16/2006 2:59 PM: > We backup a CIFS network drive, which stores scanned images on a > windows machine, to which it is mapped. > > Since Images are'nt modified they are just read. The application team > claims that the drive gets updated with 4 GB of data everyday. > > We have used a cumulative Incremental backup type and it is observed that > > SUN -> Full backup -> 120 GB > > Mon -> cumulative incremental backup -> 74 GB > > Tue -> cumulative incremental 76 GB > > Why is the backup so huge when we have specified only cumulative > incremental?? The backup size shd have been approx 8 GB by TUE. > > Another question is whether we can identfiy images about to expire on > a particular day??? I need to identify images which have'nt been > vaulted and which are nearing expiry. _______________________________________________ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu |
_______________________________________________ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
