reports saveset of client backed up over midnight

[nepomuk]

Hi there

I try to list the savesets of client test beeing backed up between 23:00 and 01:00.

whats the correct mminfo command.


Pat

 

[605]

To my knowledge, this is not possible. In general you have two options:

mminfo -q &quot;savetime>....., savetime<.....&quot; -r report

This will not work because you use savetime more than once


However,

mminfo -t &quot;time&quot; -r report

will also not work because it will report all save sets created after that time.

Conclusion: You must create a mminfo report which has to be filtered later somehow.

 

[TDun]

Try it with 2 -q's one for from, one for to.

 

[nepomuk]

mminfo -av -q &quot;savetime>=mm/DD/yy 22:00:00,savetime<=mm/DD/yy 01:00:00&quot;

this also works with &quot;yesterday 10:00:00&quot;

regards Patrik

 

[605]

Hmm ... which version do you use. If i run this command on NW 7.1/Windows, this is what i get:

C:\>mminfo -q &quot;savetime>=10/23/03 13:10:00, savetime>=10/23/03 13:20:00&quot; -r ssid
mminfo: query constraint `savetime' specified more than once
usage: mminfo [-avV] [-o order] [-s server] [-x exportspec] [report] [query] [volname...]

<report>: [ -m | -p | -B | -S | -X | -r reportspec ]
<query>: [-c client] [-N name] [-t time] [-q queryspec]

C:\>


... as i reported. If something changed, let's verify it !

 

[RMinNJ]

I think he meant your savetime query must be something like:

-q 'savetime>=yesterday 23:00:00,savetime<=01:00:00 today'

This works for me on Networker 6.1.2 on Solaris.


RM

 

[605]

You are right, it even works on Windows. Please note that the error message is misleading:
- It is no problem to use a parameter more than once ... but
- It does not make sense to use the same variable AND the same paramater more than once.

The command should have read

C:\>mminfo -q &quot;savetime>=.., savetime<=..&quot; -r ssid

instead of

C:\>mminfo -q &quot;savetime>=.., savetime>=..&quot; -r ssid

Please check the second &quot;savetime&quot; statement.


If i would have copied the command within my first response, i should have noticed this myself ;-)