Welcome! » Log In » Create A New Profile

How to set default include/exclude rules on server but allow clients to override?

Posted by Genet Begashaw 
Thank you

Genet Begashaw
This message was imported via the External PhorumMail Module
Genet:

For us it is simple: create a client option set with the list of include/exclude rules with FORCE=NO. Complexity comes from number of client options sets needed to support different platforms (Win 7, Win 10, OS X, macOS, various Linux destroys) and determining which client option set to assign a given node

YMMV,
Bob

Robert Talda
EZ-Backup Systems Engineer
Cornell University
+1 607-255-8280
rpt4@cornell.edu


> On Jun 13, 2018, at 8:56 AM, Genet Begashaw <gbegasha@UMD.EDU> wrote:
>
> Thank you
>
> Genet Begashaw
This message was imported via the External PhorumMail Module
Thanks for your response, on the server side it was included by Optionset
with force=no, i tried to overwrite in the client side in dsm.opt file with
different mgmt class like shown below

include.systemstate ALL MC-mgmt-name

still did not work​

Thank you





On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 9:37 AM Robert Talda <rpt4@cornell.edu> wrote:

> Genet:
>
> For us it is simple: create a client option set with the list of
> include/exclude rules with FORCE=NO. Complexity comes from number of
> client options sets needed to support different platforms (Win 7, Win 10,
> OS X, macOS, various Linux destroys) and determining which client option
> set to assign a given node
>
> YMMV,
> Bob
>
> Robert Talda
> EZ-Backup Systems Engineer
> Cornell University
> +1 607-255-8280
> rpt4@cornell.edu
>
>
> > On Jun 13, 2018, at 8:56 AM, Genet Begashaw <gbegasha@UMD.EDU> wrote:
> >
> > Thank you
> >
> > Genet Begashaw
>
This message was imported via the External PhorumMail Module
Hi,
parametr Force has no affect to include/exclude in cloptset.
use q inclexcl client command to check resulting (cloptset+dsm.opt) include/exclude in normal order (from top to bottom).
You will find that server include/exclude processed first.
Efim


> 13 июня 2018 г., в 16:43, Genet Begashaw <gbegasha@UMD.EDU> написал(а):
>
> Thanks for your response, on the server side it was included by Optionset
> with force=no, i tried to overwrite in the client side in dsm.opt file with
> different mgmt class like shown below
>
> include.systemstate ALL MC-mgmt-name
> ​
> still did not work​
>
> Thank you
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 9:37 AM Robert Talda <rpt4@cornell.edu> wrote:
>
>> Genet:
>>
>> For us it is simple: create a client option set with the list of
>> include/exclude rules with FORCE=NO. Complexity comes from number of
>> client options sets needed to support different platforms (Win 7, Win 10,
>> OS X, macOS, various Linux destroys) and determining which client option
>> set to assign a given node
>>
>> YMMV,
>> Bob
>>
>> Robert Talda
>> EZ-Backup Systems Engineer
>> Cornell University
>> +1 607-255-8280
>> rpt4@cornell.edu
>>
>>
>>> On Jun 13, 2018, at 8:56 AM, Genet Begashaw <gbegasha@UMD.EDU> wrote:
>>>
>>> Thank you
>>>
>>> Genet Begashaw
>>
This message was imported via the External PhorumMail Module
Genet

Personally I would like all possible client options to be set from the server. The client option set mechanism is limited in that only one can be specified and they cannot, for example, include one set in another.

At one time, I had a set of m4 macros (I'm from a unix background) that generated a client option set. When a new, non-standard box needed something different, I created a new macro with the node's name, included the standard options and then added any more that were necessary, then generated a tailored option set for the node, also with the node's name.

It had the advantage that if a global change needed to be made, that was quite easy, and unix build tools could be leveraged. (I could have used make, but preferred Ruby's rake)

Hope that helps... it might if you are unix savvy

Cheers

Steve

Steven Harris
TSM Admin/Consultant
Canberra Australia

-----Original Message-----
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of Genet Begashaw
Sent: Wednesday, 13 June 2018 11:44 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] How to set default include/exclude rules on server but allow clients to override?

Thanks for your response, on the server side it was included by Optionset
with force=no, i tried to overwrite in the client side in dsm.opt file with
different mgmt class like shown below

include.systemstate ALL MC-mgmt-name

still did not work​

Thank you





On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 9:37 AM Robert Talda <rpt4@cornell.edu> wrote:

> Genet:
>
> For us it is simple: create a client option set with the list of
> include/exclude rules with FORCE=NO. Complexity comes from number of
> client options sets needed to support different platforms (Win 7, Win 10,
> OS X, macOS, various Linux destroys) and determining which client option
> set to assign a given node
>
> YMMV,
> Bob
>
> Robert Talda
> EZ-Backup Systems Engineer
> Cornell University
> +1 607-255-8280
> rpt4@cornell.edu
>
>
> > On Jun 13, 2018, at 8:56 AM, Genet Begashaw <gbegasha@UMD.EDU> wrote:
> >
> > Thank you
> >
> > Genet Begashaw
>


This message and any attachment is confidential and may be privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure. You should immediately delete the message if you are not the intended recipient. If you have received this email by mistake please delete it from your system; you should not copy the message or disclose its content to anyone.

This electronic communication may contain general financial product advice but should not be relied upon or construed as a recommendation of any financial product. The information has been prepared without taking into account your objectives, financial situation or needs. You should consider the Product Disclosure Statement relating to the financial product and consult your financial adviser before making a decision about whether to acquire, hold or dispose of a financial product.

For further details on the financial product please go to http://www.bt.com.au

Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future performance.
This message was imported via the External PhorumMail Module
Unsubscribe

-----Original Message-----
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of Harris, Steven
Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2018 6:56 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] How to set default include/exclude rules on server but allow clients to override?

WARNING: This email message did not originate from Duquesne Light and is from an external organization. DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and are certain the content is safe.


Genet

Personally I would like all possible client options to be set from the server. The client option set mechanism is limited in that only one can be specified and they cannot, for example, include one set in another.

At one time, I had a set of m4 macros (I'm from a unix background) that generated a client option set. When a new, non-standard box needed something different, I created a new macro with the node's name, included the standard options and then added any more that were necessary, then generated a tailored option set for the node, also with the node's name.

It had the advantage that if a global change needed to be made, that was quite easy, and unix build tools could be leveraged. (I could have used make, but preferred Ruby's rake)

Hope that helps... it might if you are unix savvy

Cheers

Steve

Steven Harris
TSM Admin/Consultant
Canberra Australia

-----Original Message-----
From: ADSM: Dist Stor Manager [mailto:ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU] On Behalf Of Genet Begashaw
Sent: Wednesday, 13 June 2018 11:44 PM
To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [ADSM-L] How to set default include/exclude rules on server but allow clients to override?

Thanks for your response, on the server side it was included by Optionset with force=no, i tried to overwrite in the client side in dsm.opt file with different mgmt class like shown below

include.systemstate ALL MC-mgmt-name

still did not work​

Thank you





On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 9:37 AM Robert Talda <rpt4@cornell.edu> wrote:

> Genet:
>
> For us it is simple: create a client option set with the list of
> include/exclude rules with FORCE=NO. Complexity comes from number of
> client options sets needed to support different platforms (Win 7, Win
> 10, OS X, macOS, various Linux destroys) and determining which client
> option set to assign a given node
>
> YMMV,
> Bob
>
> Robert Talda
> EZ-Backup Systems Engineer
> Cornell University
> +1 607-255-8280
> rpt4@cornell.edu
>
>
> > On Jun 13, 2018, at 8:56 AM, Genet Begashaw <gbegasha@UMD.EDU> wrote:
> >
> > Thank you
> >
> > Genet Begashaw
>


This message and any attachment is confidential and may be privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure. You should immediately delete the message if you are not the intended recipient. If you have received this email by mistake please delete it from your system; you should not copy the message or disclose its content to anyone.

This electronic communication may contain general financial product advice but should not be relied upon or construed as a recommendation of any financial product. The information has been prepared without taking into account your objectives, financial situation or needs. You should consider the Product Disclosure Statement relating to the financial product and consult your financial adviser before making a decision about whether to acquire, hold or dispose of a financial product.

For further details on the financial product please go to http://www.bt.com.au

Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future performance.
This message was imported via the External PhorumMail Module
Efim is correct, both about the force and about processing order. I got ahead of myself. We built our client option sets to be as inclusive as possible, within minimal include and exclude statements, so that clients could override the behavior with includes and excludes that got processed because there were no conflicting server side options. Resulted in a blind spot in my thinking - we haven’t had a customer need to override the management classes provided.

A possible alternative solution: create a separate domain with the same management classes, but with different retention and storage characteristics defined by those classes as needed. Then, assign the nodes as needed to that domain. That is, get to the same destination - system state information handled in a different manner - by changing the underlying behavior of the assigned management class, not the name

FWIW,
Bob

(And thanks, Efim, for catching my error!)



Robert Talda
EZ-Backup Systems Engineer
Cornell University
+1 607-255-8280
rpt4@cornell.edu


> On Jun 13, 2018, at 2:26 PM, Efim <aefim771@GMAIL.COM> wrote:
>
> Hi,
> parametr Force has no affect to include/exclude in cloptset.
> use q inclexcl client command to check resulting (cloptset+dsm.opt) include/exclude in normal order (from top to bottom).
> You will find that server include/exclude processed first.
> Efim
>
>
>> 13 июня 2018 г., в 16:43, Genet Begashaw <gbegasha@UMD.EDU> написал(а):
>>
>> Thanks for your response, on the server side it was included by Optionset
>> with force=no, i tried to overwrite in the client side in dsm.opt file with
>> different mgmt class like shown below
>>
>> include.systemstate ALL MC-mgmt-name
>> ​
>> still did not work​
>>
>> Thank you
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 9:37 AM Robert Talda <rpt4@cornell.edu> wrote:
>>
>>> Genet:
>>>
>>> For us it is simple: create a client option set with the list of
>>> include/exclude rules with FORCE=NO. Complexity comes from number of
>>> client options sets needed to support different platforms (Win 7, Win 10,
>>> OS X, macOS, various Linux destroys) and determining which client option
>>> set to assign a given node
>>>
>>> YMMV,
>>> Bob
>>>
>>> Robert Talda
>>> EZ-Backup Systems Engineer
>>> Cornell University
>>> +1 607-255-8280
>>> rpt4@cornell.edu
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Jun 13, 2018, at 8:56 AM, Genet Begashaw <gbegasha@UMD.EDU> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Thank you
>>>>
>>>> Genet Begashaw
>>>
This message was imported via the External PhorumMail Module
Good points, Bob. Some other thoughts:

The FORCE option has no effect for additive options such as DOMAIN,
INCLUDE, and EXCLUDE. If you think you might want to allow the individual
system administrator some flexibility on what to include or exclude, omit
it from the list.

Since the "include.systemstate" option was referenced, I also suggest
reviewing the following "best practices" link related to backup of Windows
system state.

https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/community/wikis/home?lang=en#!/wiki/Tivoli%20Storage%20Manager/page/Best%20Practices%20for%20Backing%20Up%20Microsoft%20Windows

Regards,

Andy

____________________________________________________________________________

Andrew Raibeck | IBM Spectrum Protect Level 3 | storman@us.ibm.com

IBM Tivoli Storage Manager links:
Product support:
https://www.ibm.com/support/entry/portal/product/tivoli/tivoli_storage_manager

Online documentation:
http://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/SSGSG7/landing/welcome_ssgsg7.html

Product Wiki:
https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/community/wikis/home/wiki/Tivoli%20Storage%20Manager

"ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU> wrote on 2018-06-14
10:39:07:

> From: Robert Talda <rpt4@CORNELL.EDU>
> To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
> Date: 2018-06-14 10:55
> Subject: Re: How to set default include/exclude rules on server but
> allow clients to override?
> Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU>
>
> Efim is correct, both about the force and about processing order.
> I got ahead of myself. We built our client option sets to be as
> inclusive as possible, within minimal include and exclude
> statements, so that clients could override the behavior with
> includes and excludes that got processed because there were no
> conflicting server side options. Resulted in a blind spot in my
> thinking - we haven’t had a customer need to override the management
> classes provided.
>
> A possible alternative solution: create a separate domain with the
> same management classes, but with different retention and storage
> characteristics defined by those classes as needed. Then, assign
> the nodes as needed to that domain. That is, get to the same
> destination - system state information handled in a different manner
> - by changing the underlying behavior of the assigned management
> class, not the name
>
> FWIW,
> Bob
>
> (And thanks, Efim, for catching my error!)
>
>
>
> Robert Talda
> EZ-Backup Systems Engineer
> Cornell University
> +1 607-255-8280
> rpt4@cornell.edu
>
>
> > On Jun 13, 2018, at 2:26 PM, Efim <aefim771@GMAIL.COM> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> > parametr Force has no affect to include/exclude in cloptset.
> > use q inclexcl client command to check resulting (cloptset
> +dsm.opt) include/exclude in normal order (from top to bottom).
> > You will find that server include/exclude processed first.
> > Efim
> >
> >
> >> 13 июня 2018 г., в 16:43, Genet Begashaw <gbegasha@UMD.EDU> написал
(а):
> >>
> >> Thanks for your response, on the server side it was included by
Optionset
> >> with force=no, i tried to overwrite in the client side in dsm.optfile
with
> >> different mgmt class like shown below
> >>
> >> include.systemstate ALL MC-mgmt-name
> >> ​
> >> still did not work​
> >>
> >> Thank you
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 9:37 AM Robert Talda <rpt4@cornell.edu> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Genet:
> >>>
> >>> For us it is simple: create a client option set with the list of
> >>> include/exclude rules with FORCE=NO. Complexity comes from number of
> >>> client options sets needed to support different platforms (Win 7, Win
10,
> >>> OS X, macOS, various Linux destroys) and determining which client
option
> >>> set to assign a given node
> >>>
> >>> YMMV,
> >>> Bob
> >>>
> >>> Robert Talda
> >>> EZ-Backup Systems Engineer
> >>> Cornell University
> >>> +1 607-255-8280
> >>> rpt4@cornell.edu
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> On Jun 13, 2018, at 8:56 AM, Genet Begashaw <gbegasha@UMD.EDU>
wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Thank you
> >>>>
> >>>> Genet Begashaw
> >>>
>
This message was imported via the External PhorumMail Module
Thanks everyone for your comments

Thank you

Genet Begashaw
IT Systems Analyst
3301 Atlantic Building
*University of Maryland*
Phone: (301) 405-955 <javascript:void(0);>5 (W)
(240)660-0024 (Cell)


On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 12:41 PM Andrew Raibeck <storman@us.ibm.com> wrote:

> Good points, Bob. Some other thoughts:
>
> The FORCE option has no effect for additive options such as DOMAIN,
> INCLUDE, and EXCLUDE. If you think you might want to allow the individual
> system administrator some flexibility on what to include or exclude, omit
> it from the list.
>
> Since the "include.systemstate" option was referenced, I also suggest
> reviewing the following "best practices" link related to backup of Windows
> system state.
>
>
> https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/community/wikis/home?lang=en#!/wiki/Tivoli%20Storage%20Manager/page/Best%20Practices%20for%20Backing%20Up%20Microsoft%20Windows
>
> Regards,
>
> Andy
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________________________
>
> Andrew Raibeck | IBM Spectrum Protect Level 3 | storman@us.ibm.com
>
> IBM Tivoli Storage Manager links:
> Product support:
>
> https://www.ibm.com/support/entry/portal/product/tivoli/tivoli_storage_manager
>
> Online documentation:
>
> http://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/SSGSG7/landing/welcome_ssgsg7.html
>
> Product Wiki:
>
> https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/community/wikis/home/wiki/Tivoli%20Storage%20Manager
>
> "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU> wrote on 2018-06-14
> 10:39:07:
>
> > From: Robert Talda <rpt4@CORNELL.EDU>
> > To: ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU
> > Date: 2018-06-14 10:55
> > Subject: Re: How to set default include/exclude rules on server but
> > allow clients to override?
> > Sent by: "ADSM: Dist Stor Manager" <ADSM-L@VM.MARIST.EDU>
> >
> > Efim is correct, both about the force and about processing order.
> > I got ahead of myself. We built our client option sets to be as
> > inclusive as possible, within minimal include and exclude
> > statements, so that clients could override the behavior with
> > includes and excludes that got processed because there were no
> > conflicting server side options. Resulted in a blind spot in my
> > thinking - we haven’t had a customer need to override the management
> > classes provided.
> >
> > A possible alternative solution: create a separate domain with the
> > same management classes, but with different retention and storage
> > characteristics defined by those classes as needed. Then, assign
> > the nodes as needed to that domain. That is, get to the same
> > destination - system state information handled in a different manner
> > - by changing the underlying behavior of the assigned management
> > class, not the name
> >
> > FWIW,
> > Bob
> >
> > (And thanks, Efim, for catching my error!)
> >
> >
> >
> > Robert Talda
> > EZ-Backup Systems Engineer
> > Cornell University
> > +1 607-255-8280
> > rpt4@cornell.edu
> >
> >
> > > On Jun 13, 2018, at 2:26 PM, Efim <aefim771@GMAIL.COM> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > > parametr Force has no affect to include/exclude in cloptset.
> > > use q inclexcl client command to check resulting (cloptset
> > +dsm.opt) include/exclude in normal order (from top to bottom).
> > > You will find that server include/exclude processed first.
> > > Efim
> > >
> > >
> > >> 13 июня 2018 г., в 16:43, Genet Begashaw <gbegasha@UMD.EDU> написал
> (а):
> > >>
> > >> Thanks for your response, on the server side it was included by
> Optionset
> > >> with force=no, i tried to overwrite in the client side in dsm.optfile
> with
> > >> different mgmt class like shown below
> > >>
> > >> include.systemstate ALL MC-mgmt-name
> > >> ​
> > >> still did not work​
> > >>
> > >> Thank you
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 9:37 AM Robert Talda <rpt4@cornell.edu>
> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Genet:
> > >>>
> > >>> For us it is simple: create a client option set with the list of
> > >>> include/exclude rules with FORCE=NO. Complexity comes from number of
> > >>> client options sets needed to support different platforms (Win 7, Win
> 10,
> > >>> OS X, macOS, various Linux destroys) and determining which client
> option
> > >>> set to assign a given node
> > >>>
> > >>> YMMV,
> > >>> Bob
> > >>>
> > >>> Robert Talda
> > >>> EZ-Backup Systems Engineer
> > >>> Cornell University
> > >>> +1 607-255-8280
> > >>> rpt4@cornell.edu
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>> On Jun 13, 2018, at 8:56 AM, Genet Begashaw <gbegasha@UMD.EDU>
> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Thank you
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Genet Begashaw
> > >>>
> >
>
This message was imported via the External PhorumMail Module
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login