Video Screencast Help
Search Video Help Close Back
to help
New in the Rewards Catalog: Vouchers for "Symantec Technical Specialist" and "Symantec Certified Specialist" exams.

Why did the restore do this?

Updated: 21 May 2010 | 4 comments
J.Hinchcliffe's picture
0 0 Votes
Login to vote
This issue has been solved. See solution.

Can anybody shed light on why a restore did this.  (I just want to understand)

if I do a restore from:
/dir1/subdir1/file1
/dir1/subdir1/file2

and I say to Restore everything to a different location ( maintaining existing sturcture)
with my destination being
e:/dir2/

I end up with
/dir2/file1
/dir2/file2

-----------------

now if I d a restore from
/dir1/subdir1/file1
/dir1/subdir1/file2

/dir1/subdir2/file3
/dir1/subdir2/file4

and again say to restore to a differnt location and say
e:/dir2/

I get

/dir2/subdir1/file1
/dir2/subdir1/file2
/dir2/subdir2/file3
/dir2/subdir2/file4

--------------------------

why on the second restore did it make the subdirs?

discussion Filed Under:

Comments

Android's picture
17
Aug
2009
1 Vote +1
Login to vote

Which Destination selection do you make

Are you choosing "Restore everything to a differnet location (maintaining existing structure)" on the second restore operation as well? 

I would think you need to choose "Restore individual directories and files to different locations".  Then choose "Change All Destinations...", in the dialog box that appears, list the full path for each source for the restore and for each specify "e:\dir2" as the destination. 

I haven't tested this and it may be what you tried already.  I can't tell from your post.  However I will try this soon if I have time and let you know the results.

Andy Welburn's picture
18
Aug
2009
0 Votes 0
Login to vote

Maybe...

... it's trying to be 'clever'  (or actually being clever?) & trying to avoid restoring duplicate file names from different sources (sub-directories) to the same location?

If it knows all the files are in only one subdirectory then it just restores the files as there will not be duplicate file names from the same source.

If it knows that the files are in 2 sub-directories then it creates those sub-directories as, maybe, it's not clever enough (or more likely it will be too resource intensive) to check those sub-directories for duplicate file names???

Just a thought, Judy, but the only one I can think of at the mo!

Regards Andy

"It's not too late to panic ..."

J.Hinchcliffe's picture
18
Aug
2009
0 Votes 0
Login to vote

you were correct

because I had two different sub dir it did it that way.
if they were all in the same sub dir it would have worked.

I had to choose the different locations and change the dir for each file so they would both land in the same sub dir in the restore.

I don't have to know how to spell....I work on Unix.
NetBackup 7.0.1 - AIX & Windows

Android's picture
18
Aug
2009
0 Votes 0
Login to vote

Glad to hear it

I was just in the process of testing this and my restore is actually running right now.  Glad to hear you got the results you needed.