| Title: | Storage Library System |
| Moderator: | COOKIE::REUTER |
| Created: | Sun Oct 13 1991 |
| Last Modified: | Fri Jun 06 1997 |
| Last Successful Update: | Fri Jun 06 1997 |
| Number of topics: | 2270 |
| Total number of notes: | 7850 |
Hi SLS folks.
I don't know too much about SLS, but a one of my customers tells me
that SLS isn't smart enough to handle a incremental restore when all
the incremental savesets are on the same tape.
According to him this problem happens because SLS tries to find the
second last saveset after the last one, when restoring the incremental
backups in reverse order.
If he's correct, how can we get around thie?
//Anders
| T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2189.1 | Avoiding duplicate saveset names may help | KIDVAX::DESOURDIS | Mon Feb 03 1997 09:04 | 12 | |
We also have to deal with at least the possibility of duplicate
savesets on the same tape, and have at least minimized the potential
problem by using the date and time of backup to create unique saveset
names in the *SBK.COM files...
$ sbkstart = F$CVTIM(,,"MONTH") + F$CVTIM(,,"DAY") + F$CVTIM(,,"HOUR")
$ SAVESET_GEN :== "DO_DISK + "".''sbkstart'"""
This might be worth a try -
Ron DeSourdis/CCS Storage Mgmt./MRO/297-3457
| |||||