<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title>TSM 6.1, dedupe & DB2</title>
		<description>Discuss TSM 6.1, dedupe & DB2</description>
		<link>http://www.backupcentral.com/mr-backup-blog-mainmenu-47/13-mr-backup-blog/223-tsm-pudding.html</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 11:07:54 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>JComments</generator>
		<atom:link href="http://www.backupcentral.com/component/jcomments/feed/com_content/223/10.html" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<item>
			<title>May be ?</title>
			<link>http://www.backupcentral.com/mr-backup-blog-mainmenu-47/13-mr-backup-blog/223-tsm-pudding.html#comment-492</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Curtis, Although I agree with the points you made. But, I know for sure about Veritas. They did not invest more their products (including backup exec and netbackup). And most of the features Symantec adds are small acquisitions. Almost complete storage stack with HP (including the JFS file system with veritas) is made by veritas. disclosure: I have spent significant part of my career in veritas R&D.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Jaspreet</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 22 Feb 2009 10:11:19 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.backupcentral.com/mr-backup-blog-mainmenu-47/13-mr-backup-blog/223-tsm-pudding.html#comment-492</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Not sure I agree with you there</title>
			<link>http://www.backupcentral.com/mr-backup-blog-mainmenu-47/13-mr-backup-blog/223-tsm-pudding.html#comment-483</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Perhaps (and I'm saying that only because I don't know) the R&D houses are smaller than before, but they're not non-existent. All the companies who you have named have released new (and sometimes very big) functionality in recent releases -- functionality that was not acquired. I haven't seen the CA or HP announcements. (It's hard to follow all of these products.) You mentioned that IBM acquired Diligent to "get dedup." Diligent's technology is completely unrelated to the dedupe coming out in TSM 6.1. TSM's dedupe was already in development before they bought Diligent. Diligent's technology was designed in a particular way that makes sense if you're going to be handed a whole bunch of different formats, but it would be silly to use it if you were designing for just one format -- and controlled that format. I'm back to the only reason I can think of. It must be easier to start at the top.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>W. Curtis Preston</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 20 Feb 2009 14:04:00 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.backupcentral.com/mr-backup-blog-mainmenu-47/13-mr-backup-blog/223-tsm-pudding.html#comment-483</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>30/70 May be ?</title>
			<link>http://www.backupcentral.com/mr-backup-blog-mainmenu-47/13-mr-backup-blog/223-tsm-pudding.html#comment-482</link>
			<description><![CDATA[There are a few startups doing source based. But a whole bunch of others trying to do target based (in backup) - CA announced new beta of ArcServe with target dedup, so did some of the others like HP (beta for DP). No one develops ... IBM, Symantec, CA, EMC have almost closed down R&D centers. They only acquire startups. IBM acquired dilligent to get dedup.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Jaspreet</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 20 Feb 2009 04:08:04 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.backupcentral.com/mr-backup-blog-mainmenu-47/13-mr-backup-blog/223-tsm-pudding.html#comment-482</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Actually it\'s 50/50</title>
			<link>http://www.backupcentral.com/mr-backup-blog-mainmenu-47/13-mr-backup-blog/223-tsm-pudding.html#comment-479</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Symantec and EMC have source-based, CommVault and IBM have target-based. One difference in both cases is that Symantec and EMC acquired, where IBM & CommVault rolled their own. The only reason I can guess is that it's easier, but that's really just a guess.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>W. Curtis Preston</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 19 Feb 2009 16:00:26 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.backupcentral.com/mr-backup-blog-mainmenu-47/13-mr-backup-blog/223-tsm-pudding.html#comment-479</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Looks like a target based dedup</title>
			<link>http://www.backupcentral.com/mr-backup-blog-mainmenu-47/13-mr-backup-blog/223-tsm-pudding.html#comment-477</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Looks like a target based dedup. I wonder why most the backup vendors have only target based dedup. It's by choice ? or by restrictions from their earlier design ? thoughts ?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Jaspreet</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 19 Feb 2009 11:22:09 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.backupcentral.com/mr-backup-blog-mainmenu-47/13-mr-backup-blog/223-tsm-pudding.html#comment-477</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

