RE: NFS or smbfs Filesystems for IDS backup?

> Network shares between Windows machines do survive network outages > and server reboots without problems; I figure that they are re- > established in the background transparently when they are accessed > again after such an outage. On the other hand, I have a NFS connection Apologies, my statement would only be true for server restarts, not (necessarily) for network outages. In the case of a server restart the share may survive but the open file should not. Since the CIFS server is stateful the client file descriptors become invalid & you have to restart the client. > between two different UNIX machines that has never survived an > outage of the NFS server. Of course, YMMV. I've restarted a NAS device with the chunks on the NFS share, longish checkpoint being the worst effect. This is because the state is held in the client (except for record locking). My argument is that NFS is by definition better than CIFS due to the fact that the protocol is stateless. > >Why don't you use onbar with ISM & file devices? > How would that help? It wouldn't help. It's just that ISM supports file devices and onbar is nicer than ontape. Agree with the Legato & ISM co-existence scariness though. Regards, ------ Willem Roos "Per sercas vi malkovri" - JS Bach (freely translated) Disclaimer http://www.shoprite.co.za/disclaimer.html sending to informix-list