Urgent question: Version retention
2002-03-05 10:07:34
Subject: |
Urgent question: Version retention |
From: |
Cory Heikel <CHEIKEL AT PSU DOT EDU> |
Date: |
Tue, 5 Mar 2002 10:04:10 -0500 |
We were hit by the klez virus over the weekend. In trying to restore some files
from pre infected state I found what appears to be a fatal flaw in the way I
have versioning set up (or a "feature" in tsm). We are running win/nt 4.0 sp6a
and tsm 4.2.1 client, the server is on aix and also 4.2.1. These are the parms
I am using.
Versions Data Exists NOLIMIT
Versions Data Deleted 2
Retain Extra Versions 33
Retain Only Version 365
Copy Mode MODIFIED
Copy Serialization SHRSTATIC
Copy Frequency 0
The idea was to be able to keep up to the last 33 days of changes to any given
file. What happened is this - when our virus program detected the virus it
renamed the files from .exe to .avb. Tivoli, it appears, did not make a
distinction between the files and just backed up the new .avb file as a newer
version of the .exe file. Since the .exe had not been changed since the end of
November, the only good backup of that file was dropped because it was over 33
days old. I believe that this is what is occurring because when I look at the
file details for these files (on the restore screen) I see this:
Name Size Modified Created Backed up
hqd.avb 98 kb 29-nov-01 02-mar-02 03-mar-02
Note that the create date is more than 3 months later than the modified date.
My questions are:
1. does this sound like a bug in tsm?
2. is it more likely a problem in the way the anti-virus software is renaming
the file?
3. Is there any was to tell tivoli to keep a certain minimum number of
versions, something along the lines of a RETAIN MINIMUM VERSIONS so that both
high and low water marks and be kept for any given copygroup?
Your help is greatly appreciated.
Cory Heikel
Sr. Systems engineer
Milton S. Hershey Medical Center
(717) 531-7972
|
<Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread>
|
- Urgent question: Version retention,
Cory Heikel <=
- Re: Urgent question: Version retention, Malbrough, Demetrius
- Re: Urgent question: Version retention, Cory Heikel
- Re: Urgent question: Version retention, Cory Heikel
- Re: Urgent question: Version retention, Malbrough, Demetrius
- Re: Urgent question: Version retention, David Longo
- Re: Urgent question: Version retention, Malbrough, Demetrius
- Re: Urgent question: Version retention, Andrew Raibeck
- Urgent question: Version retention, Cory Heikel
- Urgent question: Version retention, Cory Heikel [mailto:CHEIKEL
|
|
|