| Title: | NetWorker |
| Notice: | kits - 12-14, problem reporting - 41.*, basics 1-100 |
| Moderator: | DECWET::RANDALL .com::lenox |
| Created: | Thu Oct 10 1996 |
| Last Modified: | Fri Jun 06 1997 |
| Last Successful Update: | Fri Jun 06 1997 |
| Number of topics: | 750 |
| Total number of notes: | 3361 |
| T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 186.1 | DECWET::ONO | The Wrong Stuff | Tue Nov 26 1996 15:28 | 7 | |
| 186.2 | How about this solution | CUSTOM::STAFFORD | Thu Dec 05 1996 13:24 | 59 | |
| 186.3 | I don't think you can do this... | DECWET::LENOX | still ticked about the HMO using SSNs as id numbers | Thu Dec 05 1996 15:54 | 15 |
| 186.4 | DECWET::RWALKER | Roger Walker - Media Changers | Thu Dec 05 1996 16:25 | 13 | |
| 186.5 | can nsrim -N -r flags help in some situations? | DECWET::CARRUTHERS | Life gets easier when you realize you can't have everything. | Mon May 05 1997 10:06 | 14 |
I've been corresponding with a customer who has a similar wish as the .0 note -- he has 1 particular save set that he doesn't want to retain as long as the majority of the save sets in client's setup. The customer has suggested setting up 2 client entries for the single clien, both using the longest required retention period, but then automating a script, which calls nsrim to clear out the index entries for the less important save set. Such as: nsrim -c clientName -N specificSaveSet -r specificPolicyForThisSS Any known problems for the customer if he takes this approach? | |||||
| 186.6 | per the release notes | DECWET::EVANS | NSR Engineering | Thu May 15 1997 11:31 | 3 |
those savesets that might cross into other volumes will not get the "other" parts removed properly. | |||||