Re: [Veritas-bu] Media Tape Writes and Retentions

[Dean]

1) Will each week of writes have a separate 5 week retention?

Yes

2) Can the tape be written to again (over week 1 space on tape) by week 6 or
will something else happen?

If the tape is not full, yes, it can still be appended to by backups that
have the same retention. But it won't write over week 1, if week 2 data is
after that on the tape. Remember, tapes are serial by their nature. You
can't insert data on a tape, generally.

3) When the time is unassigned I am assuming that is all backup images
expiring. Will the tape be written to as long as it is in a Library or drive
and not write protected ..  every time a segment of images expire on the
tape?

Hmm, not sure what you mean here. Once the tape is full, every image on the
tape needs to have expired before the tape will be used for writing again.
If an earlier image on the tape has expired, there is no way for NBU to
insert a new backup image over the expired image, Tapes are "append only".

 4) When that happens how does the time assigned change? Will it keep the
initial time assigned or change to the Latest time assigned image?

I'm not really sure, but I think the "time assigned" value stays the same.
It always indicates the time the first image was written to that tape,
regardless of whether that image has since expired or not.



On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 4:03 AM,  wrote:

>  I should clairfi this part
>
> now you have   blankspace, week2image, week3i mage, week4image
>
>
>
> it is not really a blankspace – it is an expired image. (the info on the
> tape does not get erased).
>
> You could still import the tape and get back week1image if needed.
>
>
>  --
>
> *From:* Jackson, Todd [mailto:c-todd.jack...@invitrogen.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 18, 2009 10:59 AM
> *To:* Judy Hinchcliffe; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
>
> *Subject:* RE: [Veritas-bu] Media Tape Writes and Retentions
>
>
>
> HI Judy
>
>
>
> Thank you for your reply
>
>
>
> Yes I was referring to IMAGES and not actual TAPE but was careless in my
> general terminology.
>
> I have no plans on mixing retentions or leaving a media tape in the Library
> after it has been assigned.
>
> We have some new policies for offsite retentions and I just wanted to throw
> out a spare of the moment scenario to gather some information.
>
>
>
> Everything you sent was Extremely helpful and very informative and I thank
> you for taking to time to
>
> explain. There were some things that I did not know that you have cleared
> up.
>
>
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
> -T
>
>
>
>
>  --
>
> *From:* judy_hinchcli...@administaff.com [mailto:
> judy_hinchcli...@administaff.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 18, 2009 11:43 AM
> *To:* Jackson, Todd; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
> *Subject:* RE: [Veritas-bu] Media Tape Writes and Retentions
>
>
>
> 1)  The IMAGE has the 5 week retention not the tape.
>
> a.   Is if you write to the same tape 3 weeks in a row the tape will
> not become scratch until the oldest images on the tape expires (week 3's
> image date + 5 weeks)
>
> 2)  no
>
> a.   when writing to a tape it will only append to the end of the
> tape, past the last written image to the tape
>
> b.  so if you have week1image, week2image,week3image, week4image
>
> c.   and ^ week1 expires
>
> d.  now you have   blankspace, week2image, week3i mage, week4image
>
> e.   and you write to the same tape again you get
>
> f.blankspace, week2image, week3image,
> week4image, week5image (tape is now full) (will not become scratch until
> week5's image expires)
>
> 3)  if the tape has no assigned time then it is a scratch, no valid
> images on it
>
> a.   if the tape is in the library and in a pool that your policy can
> use or the scratch pool it can be written to.
>
> b.  If you leave the tape in the library your backups will continue to
> write to the tape until it is FULL
>
> c.   If the tape becomes FULL meaning that it has written all the way
> to the EOT it will NOT write to again until all images on the tape have
> expired (see #2)
>
> d.  If you do not allow different retention levels on the same tape –
> say mixing of 5 week retention and 6 month retention, then it will choose a
> different tape for the 6 month retention.
>
> 4)  As the first image is written to the tape it gets an assigned
> date.  On the second day when it writes to the tape it will not change the
> assigned date, but it will change the expiration date (as the expiration
> date is based on when the last image on the tape will expire and the tape
> becomes scratch.)
>
>
>
> In my production environment we remove the tapes from the library every
> morning and send them off site.  So my assigned time on my tape represents
> when my backups were done, because I do NOT put more then one days backup on
> a tape ( what if the tape went bad and I could not read it, I could loose
> days of da

Re: [Veritas-bu] Experiences with Netapp backups

[Dean]

We're using NDMP to FC tape for weekly fulls, and NDMP to a disk staging STU
on the master server for daily differentials.
It's very reliable. The only issue I have is the performance. For the FULLs,
we write to 2 tape drives in parallel. We get about 50-60 MB/sec to each
drive. I know the drives are capable of a lot more - our Linux media servers
can pump out 160 MB/sec to a single drive. But our Netapp box is relatively
low end and quite old now (V3020 gateway - which has been superseded)

It takes just over 24 hours to do the weekly FULL backup (about 10TB). We
run one backup stream per Netapp volume, of which there about 22, ranging in
size up to 1.3TB. We don't multiplex to the tapes - writing one stream per
tape drive.

I've messed around with multiplexing and the number of drives being used in
parallel, but I've never been able to get it above that 50-60 MB/sec per
drive.

The drives are IBM 3592-E05 (TS1120 is their other name, I think).

Doing the daily DIFFs to disk works well. Incremental backups can take a
long time to decide what actually needs to be backed up before any I/O
actually happens. Directing these to disk means NDMP is not holding a tape
drive for a long time without actually doing any I/O.

NDMP to disk became possible with either 6.5.1 or 6.5.2

A nice thing is that ONTAP (the Netapp operating system) seems to be pretty
good at prioritising "user I/O" over backup I/O. If our full backups run
into online time, when we have thousands of users connected connected via
CIFS for their desktop file serving needs, the backup speed will drop right
down, as ONTAP prioritises the user's I/O. Annoying for the backups, but
good overall for end user performance.

Cheers,
Dean

On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 12:44 AM, Michael Graff Andersen
wrote:

> Hello
>
> After our Netapp demo, I got curious what are the experiences of people
> that have Netapp in production for backup ?
>
> Regards
> Michael
>
> ___
> Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
> http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
>
>
___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

[Michitsch, John]

Correct, but we are not doing the Exchange or 2008 piece yet, just OS level 
backups.

From: judy_hinchcli...@administaff.com [mailto:judy_hinchcli...@administaff.com]
Sent: 21 February, 2009 10:49 AM
To: Michitsch, John; VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

I thought you need 6.5.3 to do exchange 2008 backups That means the client 
needs to be at least at 6.5.3.


From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu 
[mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Michitsch, John
Sent: Saturday, February 21, 2009 9:04 AM
To: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

We upgraded out master and two media servers to 6.5.3.1 (in order to backup a 
standby Exchange CCR node and Windows 2008) this week and our full backups this 
weekend are running incredibly slow, about 1/3 the normal speed.  The client 
agents have not been upgraded, they are at v. 6.5.1.  Do you think upgrading 
the agent will fix the speed issue, or am I going to need to open a support 
case?

Thoughts?

Thanks.

From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu 
[mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Ed Wilts
Sent: 20 February, 2009 10:08 AM
To: Preston, Doug
Cc: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 8:06 AM, Preston, Doug 
mailto:dpres...@landam.com>> wrote:

 There are a lot of your customers that would rather have a 32bit install 
instead of having to install all new machines twice.

3 times.  6.5 base, 6.5.3 patch kit, then 6.5.3.1 security patch.  Without 
LiveUpdate, I can't see any way to shrink this to less than 3 separate installs.

   .../Ed
Ed Wilts, RHCE, BCFP, BCSD, SCSP, SCSE
ewi...@ewilts.org
___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

[Veritas-bu] VMWAre and Hyper-V backup and recovery; plus Solaris..strategies and approaches???

[Siano, James C]

Hello

 

What product mix and configurations are being used to backup and
restore/recovery VMware and Hyper-V systems.

How are folks setting up in order to provide for individual file
recovery and entire open-hot images?   Client per machine or physical,
host, other product mixes?

 

My focus has been on Windows OS, but, what strategies are also being
used relative to Solaris VM capabilities?

 

Thanks.

 

___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] SQL issue

[bob944]

> Update from my DBA - these are transaction log backups, and 
> he added a new database - since the TL will fail if there is 
> not a backup, that is what caused the issue. Why would 
> NetBackup not see this? He claims his SQL scripts ran through 
> and finished, but the parent jobs never acknowledged this. 
> 
> I have received a recommendation to get a patch for the 
> bpbrm, but that was based on 5.1 mp6. Shouldn't 6.5.2A have 
> any patches from 5.1?
> 
> 
> NetBackup support response is that this is not their problem. 
> Any ideas?

Add a database; do a full.  Is there a problem after that?


___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

[judy_hinchcliffe]

I thought you need 6.5.3 to do exchange 2008 backups That means the
client needs to be at least at 6.5.3.

 



From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
[mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of
Michitsch, John
Sent: Saturday, February 21, 2009 9:04 AM
To: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1
(6.5.3.1)

 

We upgraded out master and two media servers to 6.5.3.1 (in order to
backup a standby Exchange CCR node and Windows 2008) this week and our
full backups this weekend are running incredibly slow, about 1/3 the
normal speed.  The client agents have not been upgraded, they are at v.
6.5.1.  Do you think upgrading the agent will fix the speed issue, or am
I going to need to open a support case?

 

Thoughts?

 

Thanks.

 

From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
[mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Ed Wilts
Sent: 20 February, 2009 10:08 AM
To: Preston, Doug
Cc: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1
(6.5.3.1)

 

On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 8:06 AM, Preston, Doug 
wrote:

 There are a lot of your customers that would rather have a 32bit
install instead of having to install all new machines twice. 


3 times.  6.5 base, 6.5.3 patch kit, then 6.5.3.1 security patch.
Without LiveUpdate, I can't see any way to shrink this to less than 3
separate installs.

   .../Ed 

Ed Wilts, RHCE, BCFP, BCSD, SCSP, SCSE 
ewi...@ewilts.org

___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] Need to Monitor Multiple Master Server through AdminConsole

[judy_hinchcliffe]

Using the admin console on a master server

On each of the master servers put add all the other master servers to
the 'others servers' list (a SERVER entry in bp.conf)


Using the admin console from your pc
Had your pc name to the 'other servers' list for each of the masters.


-Original Message-
From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
[mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of NBU
Sent: Saturday, February 21, 2009 3:42 AM
To: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: [Veritas-bu] Need to Monitor Multiple Master Server through
AdminConsole


Any ideas pls.

+--
|This was sent by qureshiu...@rediffmail.com via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com.
+--


___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu



___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

[Michitsch, John]

We upgraded out master and two media servers to 6.5.3.1 (in order to backup a 
standby Exchange CCR node and Windows 2008) this week and our full backups this 
weekend are running incredibly slow, about 1/3 the normal speed.  The client 
agents have not been upgraded, they are at v. 6.5.1.  Do you think upgrading 
the agent will fix the speed issue, or am I going to need to open a support 
case?

Thoughts?

Thanks.

From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu 
[mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Ed Wilts
Sent: 20 February, 2009 10:08 AM
To: Preston, Doug
Cc: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 8:06 AM, Preston, Doug 
mailto:dpres...@landam.com>> wrote:

 There are a lot of your customers that would rather have a 32bit install 
instead of having to install all new machines twice.

3 times.  6.5 base, 6.5.3 patch kit, then 6.5.3.1 security patch.  Without 
LiveUpdate, I can't see any way to shrink this to less than 3 separate installs.

   .../Ed
Ed Wilts, RHCE, BCFP, BCSD, SCSP, SCSE
ewi...@ewilts.org
___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

[Veritas-bu] Need to Monitor Multiple Master Server through Admin Console

[NBU]

Any ideas pls.

+--
|This was sent by qureshiu...@rediffmail.com via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com.
+--


___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu