Umm, that was kinda the point I was trying to make, Bob. :-) Laura
> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bob Anderson > Sent: Friday, November 03, 2006 11:09 AM > To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT - Backup Follies > > Laura, > It doesn't matter what the boot order is. Most servers > have an internal Raid configuration that doesn't kick in > until after the machine goes through it's start up and by > them it has found the USB and not the hard disks. > > And yes I have this on two of my servers. > > Bob Anderson > IT Guy > Kent Sporting Goods > 433 Park Ave. S > New London OH 44851 > 419-929-7021 x315 > email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Laura A. > Robinson > Sent: Friday, November 03, 2006 10:52 AM > To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT - Backup Follies > > What's the boot order in the BIOS on those machines? > > Laura > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Albert Duro > > Sent: Friday, November 03, 2006 10:54 AM > > To: ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org > > Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] OT - Backup Follies > > > > Ah, that brings up another interesting point. I use USB > external hard > > > drives too, and I've found that some WinXP and > > Server2003 machines will not boot if a USB hard drive is > attached--I > > have to remember to turn it off while booting. > > Anyone else seen this? > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Susan Bradley, CPA aka Ebitz - SBS Rocks [MVP]" > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org> > > Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2006 9:02 PM > > Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] OT - Backup Follies (was) Exchange > Log files > > --Disk > > Full-- > > > > > > > No tape drives here. If it has a USB connection we are > in business. > > > > > > > > > Albert Duro wrote: > > >> Yes, BE does do disk backup. But I have some objections: > > >> A. They don't make it easy, infact they make an unnecessarily > > >> complicated production of it. > > >> B. I started doing NTBackup to disk while (and because) > > I was still > > >> troubleshooting BE. When I gave up on BE and its > > brethren, NTBackup > > >> was a natural segway, and already in place and working. > > >> C. I discovered one great advantage that > > NTBackup-to-disk has over > > >> any other backup system: with a bit of planning, it is > > proof against > > >> almost any combination of crash and burn. You have a > > backup file on > > >> two or more disks/machines. Things go bad, you can do > > recovery from > > >> any Windows machine; you can move or copy the backup > > disks/files to > > >> any machine. Try doing that with a sophisticated tape-based or > > >> SAN-based system. Imagine having to replace the tape > > >> drive/autoloader with the exact same type, while rebuilding a > > >> same-hardware three-year old server to the exact same > > configuration, > > >> same SPs, same backup software, same drivers. I can > > guarantee that > > >> at least one of those necessary replacement elements will be > > >> impossible to find, even under leisurely conditions. [1] > > Yes, there > > >> are strategies to deal with that, but if you could spend > > that kind of > > >> money, you would have gotten a double-redundant > > bullet-proof system in the first place. > > >> I truly hope that I'm wrong out of lack of knowledge and > > pessimism. > > >> I am open to being corrected and encouraged. > > >> [1] Naturally, the tape drive drivers will be on the same > > tape that > > >> you can't access nohow. Download the drivers from the > > OEM, you say? > > >> Chances are excellent that the OEM has gone out of > > business, or sold > > >> out to a giant who prunes out what they don't like (and > what you > > >> need), or changed the name or version number on it out of sheer > > >> orneryness. If you do get to what looks like the right drivers, > > >> you're likely to find that the last minor upgrade version > > that really > > >> worked well for you has been dropped, or tweaked into > your trouble > > >> zone. I can testify to ALL these experiences. I think > > others can too. > > >> ----- Original Message ----- > > >> > > >> *From:* Al Mulnick <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >> *To:* ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org > > >> <mailto:ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org> > > >> *Sent:* Thursday, November 02, 2006 3:27 PM > > >> *Subject:* Re: [ActiveDir] OT - Backup Follies (was) > > Exchange Log > > >> files --Disk Full-- > > >> > > >> Trying to remember exactly, but doesn't BE have an > > option to use > > >> disk vs. tape drives? > > >> > > >> You *could* run a test to help simplify and rule out > > some of the > > >> complexity. Could take a while, but might be worth it. > > >> > > >> Al > > >> > > >> On 11/2/06, *Albert Duro* <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: > > >> > > >> Why does NTBackup work for me and BE not, when > they are at > > >> core the same product? > > >> I wondered about that too. Here are my thoughts. > > >> First, NTBackup is a simpler product that doesn't > > get tangled > > >> up with the complexities of scheduling and a GUI. > > >> But the real reason, I think, is that I've been doing > > >> NTBackups to disk, while BE was to tape. > > >> I've always suspected that most, if not all of my > > difficulties > > >> with BE had to do with the drivers for the tape > drives and > > >> autoloaders, and with the SCSI interface to other devices > > >> ('other' being anything beyond the normal HD and CD > > >> complement) > > >> > > >> ----- Original Message ----- > > >> *From:* Al Mulnick <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >> *To:* ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org > > >> <mailto:ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org> > > >> *Sent:* Wednesday, November 01, 2006 6:11 AM > > >> *Subject:* Re: [ActiveDir] Exchange Log files --Disk > > >> Full-- > > >> > > >> Well put Albert. Thanks for that feedback. > > >> What still has me curious is why BE wouldn't > > work in your > > >> environment and why ntbackup does (partially > > at least). > > >> ntbackup as written by the same exact people and has a lot > > >> of the same code (it's licensed by Microsoft > > from Seagate > > >> last I checked). Ntbackup is the less > featured version > > >> designed for single host backups and extended > > to act like > > >> it does more. > > >> > > >> So that said, I agree that the goal is that > > your client's > > >> data is backed up. I have to say that I > disagree that > > >> jury-rigs, mickey mouse and by the seat of > > your pants is > > >> the long term solution though. That's an > > infrastructure > > >> component that will come back to haunt at some > > point down > > >> the road. As an interim fix, of course it can > > work. I'm > > >> not blinded by the big vendors to the point > > that I think > > >> they have the only solution. Far from it. > > But I like to > > >> think that I can at least share some perspective and > > >> experience related to where it leads and I definitely > > >> favor technology over layer8 processes. Why? Because > > >> layer8 changes and grows out of current positions and > > >> foundational solutions should not have to be > decimated > > >> when that happens. I've seen that way too > > often to care > > >> to see it continue where possible. > > >> > > >> Basically, I hate to see a foundational > > solution such as > > >> backup, rely on such complexity and human > > intervention. I > > >> completely understand that you have to do what > > you have to > > >> do. When you wrote it in your original email, > > it sounded > > >> like you approved of that method. Reading > > this last one, > > >> I can you don't. I was just trying to point > out where > > >> that leads and trying to understand how you go > > there. I > > >> bet I would have gotten there the same way you did ;) > > >> > > >> Best of luck getting that worked out. > > >> If you need anything from me, please don't > hesitate. I > > >> have been known to make some backup > solutions work :) > > >> Feel free to ping off-line if I can be of any help. > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> On 10/31/06, *Albert Duro* <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: > > >> > > >> Al, since you ask, no I don't see it > > differently, at > > >> least not at the oratorical level. But where the > > >> rubber meets the road, things can look > > very different. > > >> Like the military say, the best laid plan > > falls apart > > >> the moment it meets the enemy. You assume that I > > >> monkey around with Ntbackup and balky media for > > >> economic reasons. In fact, we spared no expense > > >> (relative to our small size) to put in > > >> industrial-strength backup systems, both > > software and > > >> hardware. Even paid consultants to set it up and > > >> manage it. > > >> It blew up in our faces. Primarily > because Backup > > >> Exec just wouldn't work right in our > environment. > > >> (I'm not saying that BE isn't a fine product, it would > > >> just never work for us). Why not? > Don't know -- I > > >> couldn't figure it out. Our consultants couldn't > > >> figure it out. Veritas support couldn't > > either, nor > > >> the autoloader manufacturer. For more > > than two years, > > >> nobody could figure it out, until I > decided to stop > > >> throwing good money after bad. > > >> Did I try alternative products? In the > same class, > > >> yes -- more tales of woe, but different > > reasons. We > > >> did not nor are we going to buy the > > high-end systems, > > >> which cost more than our whole network is worth. > > >> So I was left with NTBackup, and admittedly a > > >> little more gun-shyness about brand-name backup > > >> products than is strictly rational. > That's what I > > >> have to work with, and I try to make the > > best of it. > > >> That's the 'real world' in my little corner of it. > > >> Believe me, when you and joe and others on > > this list > > >> urge us to 'make the best', I listen, I > > learn, and I > > >> applaud. And it does push me in that > > direction. But > > >> the only path there goes through 'make > the best of > > >> what you've got'. It's bumpy and often > barricaded. > > >> But after all is said and done, the REAL > > point is that > > >> I am preserving my clients' data and keeping them > > >> happy. Jury-rigs, mickey mouse, and > > by-the-pants not > > >> withstanding. > > >> > > >> -- Original Message ----- > > >> > > >> *From:* Al Mulnick > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >> *To:* ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org > > >> <mailto:ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org> > > >> *Sent:* Sunday, October 29, 2006 4:30 AM > > >> *Subject:* Re: [ActiveDir] Exchange Log files > > >> --Disk Full-- > > >> > > >> sub-optimal media are part of the real world? > > >> Wow, thanks :) > > >> Truth be told, that's a rant of mine. > > I've heard > > >> a lot (lately especially) about how we > > want to do > > >> things cheap and inexpensive and we'll fix it > > >> later and so on. I've also spent a > > great deal of > > >> time cleaning up that kind of stuff. > > >> Unfortunately, once it escapes into the "real > > >> world" then it becomes more difficult > > to clean up > > >> because you have to do so in front of > > >> customers/clients. > > >> Interesting approach though. Usually a less > > >> disciplined from what I've seen and > > often results > > >> in more expense related to downtime and > > >> troubleshooting and lack of service. I'm > > >> interested if you see differently though. > > >> This area of the business fascinates me.... > > >> > > >> On 10/28/06, *Albert Duro* > > >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: > > >> > > >> I'm sure you and Susan are > right. All I'm > > >> saying is that it *can* happen, > and for me, > > >> why take the chance when > > one-job/one-task is > > >> easy to do. > > >> Good point about the media, and that may > > >> explain my case, but, hey, > > sub-optimal media > > >> situations are part of the real world. > > >> > > >> ----- Original Message ----- > > >> *From:* Al Mulnick > > >> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >> *To:* ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org > > >> <mailto:ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org> > > >> *Sent:* Saturday, October 28, > > 2006 6:33 AM > > >> *Subject:* Re: [ActiveDir] > Exchange Log > > >> files --Disk Full-- > > >> > > >> I've not had that same experience. > > >> Granted, it's a limited feature utility > > >> (note the use of the word > > utility vs. tool > > >> as requested) but it's still > capable of > > >> doing more. There were some fixes to > > >> ntbackup in service packs and > > such. You > > >> might want to verify you're using the > > >> latest version of that's > what you see. > > >> Also, check the media it's > headed to. > > >> It's error handling is not very elegant, > > >> but I've found it to be useful > > and strong > > >> enough to stand up to some > > complex tasks > > >> in the past. I've got several > > running now > > >> via cli that have been in > > place for more > > >> than half a year without issue > > (I know, I > > >> know, spend all that money on an > > >> enterprise backup system > only to backup > > >> some machines locally. But there are > > >> times when it makes more > > sense, trust me.) > > >> -ajm > > >> > > >> > > >> On 10/27/06, *Albert Duro* > > >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >> > > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: > > >> > > >> I've found, with NTbackup, > > that if you > > >> cram two or more tasks > > into a backup > > >> job, it's very likely to > fail. For > > >> example, if you do a > > System State and > > >> a file backup and an > > Exchange backup > > >> in the same job. It's best to > > >> separate each task into > > its own job, > > >> and sort it out in the > scheduling. > > >> A mixed job will also work > > for a while > > >> and then fail, which > > sounds like what > > >> happened to OP. > > >> > > >> ----- Original Message ----- > > >> *From:* Wells, James Arthur > > >> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >> *To:* > > ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org > > >> > > <mailto:ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org> > > >> *Cc:* Technical Support > > >> > > >> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >> > > >> *Sent:* Thursday, > > October 26, 2006 > > >> 2:21 PM > > >> *Subject:* RE: [ActiveDir] > > >> Exchange Log files > > --Disk Full-- > > >> > > >> Do you have multiple > > information > > >> stores on this > storage group? > > >> (If using Exchange Enterprise > > >> edition)...the logs > can't flush > > >> until all stores have a full > > >> backup, because the logs are > > >> shared... > > >> --James > > >> > > >> > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > > ---------- > > >> *From:* > > >> > > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >> > > >> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >> [mailto: > > >> > > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >> > > >> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>] > > >> *On Behalf Of > > *Technical Support > > >> *Sent:* Thursday, > > October 26, 2006 > > >> 3:16 PM > > >> *To:* > > >> ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org > > >> > > >> <mailto:ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org>; > > >> ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org > > >> > > <mailto:ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org> > > >> *Subject:* RE: [ActiveDir] > > >> Exchange Log files > > --Disk Full-- > > >> > > >> Hi, > > >> I am running Normal > > Backup. Using > > >> NTBackup Utility. Backing up > > >> Information store. > > >> > > >> > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > > ---------- > > >> *From:* > > >> > > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >> > > >> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >> on behalf of Missy Koslosky > > >> *Sent:* Thu > 10/26/2006 12:49 PM > > >> *To:* > > ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org > > >> > > <mailto:ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org> > > >> *Subject:* RE: [ActiveDir] > > >> Exchange Log files > > --Disk Full-- > > >> > > >> Are you running full > > (AKA normal) > > >> backups every night? > > It seems not. > > >> Use NTBackup to > backup to disk > > >> (obviously, you'll > need a disk > > >> with over 120GB of available > > >> space) and then use whatever > > >> normal program you > use to back > > >> that backup onto tape. > > This will > > >> keep you running > until you sort > > >> out why your normal backup > > >> software isn't > > flushing the logs > > >> when the backup completes. > > >> How are you > currently running > > >> backups? What software > > is in use? > > >> Are you sure it's > > Exchange aware? > > >> Are you doing brick > > level backups > > >> or copy backups > > instead of a full > > >> backup? Neither will > > flush the logs. > > >> I'd resolve this as > quickly as > > >> possible, because if > > you are in a > > >> situation where you > > have to replay > > >> the logs, you're NOT > > going to be a > > >> happy camper. > > >> > > >> > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > > ---------- > > >> *From:* > > >> > > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >> > > >> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >> [mailto: > > >> > > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >> > > >> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>] > > >> *On Behalf Of > > *Technical Support > > >> *Sent:* Thursday, > > October 26, 2006 > > >> 11:09 AM > > >> *To:* > > ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org > > >> > > <mailto:ActiveDir@mail.activedir.org> > > >> *Subject:* > [ActiveDir] Exchange > > >> Log files --Disk Full-- > > >> > > >> Hi All, > > >> Kindly suggest, > what i can do > > >> about my Exchange Log files? > > >> I have about 120 GB > > Log files for > > >> past 4 months. I have > > a few doubts:- > > >> Do i really need all > > those log > > >> files? > > >> If yes, Then how is it > > possible to > > >> manage with this as i > > have a very > > >> limited space left. > > >> Can i delete these log files? > > >> Backup doesnt remove > > these log files? > > >> i am really running > > out of space > > >> on my Exchange log > > storage drive. > > >> *Thanks!!!* > > >> Ravi > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > > > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > > > List archive: > > > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir@mail.activedir.org/ > > > > > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > > List archive: > > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir@mail.activedir.org/ > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > List archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir@mail.activedir.org/ > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > List archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir@mail.activedir.org/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/activedir@mail.activedir.org/
