Re: [Veritas-bu] Backup job gets to mounting tape but never to position
Are you certain that the host can communicate with the drive? I don't see any message that the tape was successfully mounted. NetBackup may not think that the tape is mounted if it can't communicate with the drive. You could try an mt command on the device to see if you can communicate with it. Alternatively, you could use robtest to mount a tape in that drive, then use the dd command to see if you can read from it. Say your drive is at /dev/rmt/0cbn ... mt -f /dev/rmt/0cbn Use robtest to mount a tape in the drive, then dd if=/dev/rmt/0cbn bs=65536 count=1 If the tape has previously been used by netbackup and has a volume header on it, you should see the tape volser somewhere in the output from the dd command Were any changes made to the server or drive? Is the drive SAN attached or SCSI? How many drives do you have? If it's a SAN drive, are you using persistent binding so that the device assignments don't change if the server is rebooted? -- Jack Forester, Jr. Senior Data Protection Analyst Symantec Certified Specialist - NetBackup 7.0 for UNIX Administration Global Technology Services Mylan 781 Chestnut Ridge Road Morgantown, WV 26505 (Embedded image moved to file: pic13558.jpg) From: Dennis Peacock To: VERITAS-BU@MAILMAN.ENG.AUBURN.EDU Date: 01/15/2013 05:37 PM Subject:[Veritas-bu] Backup job gets to mounting tape but never to position Sent by:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu NBU 7.1x running on Solaris 9 box. 01/15/2013 16:29:29 - Info bptm (pid=24504) Waiting for mount of media id EF0997 (copy 1) on server gandalf. 01/15/2013 16:29:29 - mounting EF0997 and it sits there foreveruntil the job fails. This has been a working environment and there are 2 clients that backup to this master server/media server. It just doesn't like backing itself up. Any ideas? +-- |This was sent by dpe...@acxiom.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
[Veritas-bu] NetBackup appliance hangs
Anyone out there using NetBackup dedupe appliances (5000, 5020) in a multiple node configuration having any problems where a content router node seems to just hang and require power-cycling? I have a NetBackup 5000 appliance at one location at version 1.4.1.1 that for some reason just hangs. It can be pinged, but console access is locked up, and ssh is similarly non-responsive. After the node is power-cycled, the storage pool comes back up and is happy until the next time. I've had this happen 3 times this year, but two of those instances have happened in the last 3 weeks. Anyone else seeing this behavior? Did 1.4.2 fix it? I'd prefer to wait until 1.4.3 or 1.4.4 to update due to our onerous change process, but who knows when they're going to be released. I'm going to reach out to Symantec support too. -- Jack Forester, Jr. Senior Data Protection Analyst Symantec Certified Specialist - NetBackup 7.0 for UNIX Administration Global Technology Services Mylan 781 Chestnut Ridge Road Morgantown, WV 26505 (Embedded image moved to file: pic17522.jpg) <>___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] options for reporting other than OpsCenter?
I'll throw in another vote for Aptare -- Jack Forester, Jr. Senior Data Protection Analyst Symantec Certified Specialist - NetBackup 7.0 for UNIX Administration Global Technology Services Mylan 781 Chestnut Ridge Road Morgantown, WV 26505 (Embedded image moved to file: pic27051.jpg) From: Jerry Hoetger To: "VERITAS-BU@MAILMAN.ENG.AUBURN.EDU" Cc: "dpe...@acxiom.com" Date: 07/17/2012 03:50 PM Subject:Re: [Veritas-bu] options for reporting other than OpsCenter? Sent by:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Take a look at APTARE StorageConsole and the Backup Manager. Best NBU analytics product out there today, IMHO. The out-of-box reports are very extensive, custom reporting is also available. Very easy to set up and start collecting and reporting. http://aptare.com/products_backup.php Jerry Hoetger APTARE jerry.hoet...@aptare.com -Original Message- From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu [ mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Dennis Peacock Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2012 12:22 PM To: VERITAS-BU@MAILMAN.ENG.AUBURN.EDU Subject: [Veritas-bu] options for reporting other than OpsCenter? I have experience with various reporting tools. These include "WysDM", Backup Profiler by Solarwinds, and OpsCenter with Analytics. The info you want out of OpsCenter will require you to write your own SQL code to generate the report and format you want. Profiler does a great job and has a lot of canned reports. All the reporting tools use the same command sets to extract the info from the backup product and stores that info in a database for the end-user/admin to generate reports from. Even with the Advanced Analytics (the one you purchase to run with OpsCenter) has a lot to be desired about reporting and the info you need/want. We've had to write custom sql scripts to get the info and format we need out of OpsCenter. So far, the tool I like best for monitoring and reporting is the Solarwinds toolBackup Profiler. +-- |This was sent by dpe...@acxiom.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 <>___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Puredisk
I have one PureDisk server at 6.6.3a + some-fix-I-can't-remember. Seems pretty solid here. Of course the only reason we set up a server rather than buy one of the 50x0 appliances was that at the time, they weren't available in the country where we wanted to deploy it. It's a target for opt-dup from a remote site plus client-side dedupe backups from the local site. No real problems except for the time one of the security certificates expired and wasn't automatically regenerated. -- Jack Forester, Jr. Senior Data Protection Analyst Symantec Certified Specialist - NetBackup 7.0 for UNIX Administration Global Technology Services Mylan 781 Chestnut Ridge Road Morgantown, WV 26505 (Embedded image moved to file: pic23927.jpg) <>___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Issues with media server dedupe pools
Actually, In the case of the restore I described, it actually did use the local copy to do the restore, it just used a remote media server to do it. It wasn't an issue of which copy to restore from, it was which media server would do the restore. The USE_BACKUP_SERVER_FOR_RESTORE option fit the bill nicely. -- Jack Forester, Jr. Sr. Data Protection Administrator Global Technology Services - AHS Mylan, Inc. 5005 Greenbag Road Morgantown, WV 26501 jack.fores...@mylan.com Phone: +1.304.554.6039 Cell: +1.412.805.5313 == CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message and all attachments transmitted with it may contain legally privileged, proprietary and/or confidential information intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution, duplication or other use of this message and/or its attachments is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message and its attachments. Thank you. == ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Issues with media server dedupe pools /replication / restores ??
Mark, We ran into this problem a few months ago when I got a call from our offshore support team who was trying to restore a file in Ireland, but it was running reeal slow. Turns out that the media server in Germany was reading the image off the Ireland media server and then sending it back to the client in Ireland. !!! In our case, we always want the media server that created the backup to perform the restore. After years of having it beat into our heads that the media server owns the media and will do the restore, this came as quite a shock. This same behavior exists on OST disk pools like DataDomain. -- Jack Forester, Jr. Sr. Data Protection Administrator Global Technology Services - AHS Mylan, Inc. 5005 Greenbag Road Morgantown, WV 26501 jack.fores...@mylan.com Phone: +1.304.554.6039 Cell: +1.412.805.5313 == CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message and all attachments transmitted with it may contain legally privileged, proprietary and/or confidential information intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution, duplication or other use of this message and/or its attachments is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message and its attachments. Thank you. == ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Issues with media server dedupe pools /replication / restores ??
Here's some info explaining the behavior: http://www.symantec.com/connect/forums/how-media-server-load-balancing-affects-restores-openstorage We use the USE_BACKUP_MEDIA_SERVER_FOR_RESTORE option in our environment as we have multiple MSDPs at locations across the country. I don't want a media server in Vermont reading a backup image in California to restore to a client in North Carolina. I hope future versions of NetBackup handle this situation better and don't assume that I always want the least busy media server to do the restore because it may not be the best server for the restore based on physical proximity. -- Jack Forester, Jr. Sr. Data Protection Administrator Global Technology Services - AHS Mylan, Inc. 5005 Greenbag Road Morgantown, WV 26501 jack.fores...@mylan.com Phone: +1.304.554.6039 Cell: +1.412.805.5313 == CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message and all attachments transmitted with it may contain legally privileged, proprietary and/or confidential information intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution, duplication or other use of this message and/or its attachments is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message and its attachments. Thank you. == ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Exchange 2010 DAG Backups And Aptare Storage Console.
We had a similar issue with Aptare and vmware backups. For all vmware backups, NetBackup was reporting the name of the ESX server as the client name, and not the name of the VM itself. We kept pressing Symantec, and they relented and fixed it. -- Jack Forester, Jr. Sr. Data Protection Administrator Global Technology Services - AHS Mylan, Inc. 5005 Greenbag Road Morgantown, WV 26501 jack.fores...@mylan.com Phone: +1.304.554.6039 Cell: +1.412.805.5313 From: "Kelczewski, Mike" To: "veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu" Date: 12/06/2011 02:17 PM Subject:[Veritas-bu] Exchange 2010 DAG Backups And Aptare Storage Console. Sent by:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Anybody using Aptare Storage Console and doing Exchange 2010 Backups? I am having an issue where the reports in Aptare are incorrect because the client name is changing from the physical Exchange server at the start of each stream to the DAG name at the end of the stream. So Aptare is reporting that those jobs are still running or queued. Been bounced between Aptare support and Symantec support on this issue. Aptare is saying client name should not change and Symantec saying that the name changing is how DAG backup work. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu == CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message and all attachments transmitted with it may contain legally privileged, proprietary and/or confidential information intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution, duplication or other use of this message and/or its attachments is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message and its attachments. Thank you. == ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Robot inquiry/poll/how well does your robot/s work?
We're using 256K buffer size and 512 buffers. We use Maxell brand tapes. How long was it before you started to have problems due to tape head wear? We only use tapes for off-site vaulting of backups. We initially write to disk, then duplicate to tape. What I think helps us most is that we are 10G ethernet front to back, and have a dedicated 10G VLAN for backup traffic between the media servers and DataDomain and multiple connections between them. -- Jack Forester, Jr. Sr. Data Protection Administrator Global Technology Services - AHS Mylan, Inc. 5005 Greenbag Road Morgantown, WV 26501 jack.fores...@mylan.com Phone: +1.304.554.6039 Cell: +1.412.805.5313 From: "David McMullin" To: "veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu" Date: 12/05/2011 09:25 AM Subject:Re: [Veritas-bu] Robot inquiry/poll/how well does your robot/s work? Sent by:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Jack - what size buffer parameters are you using with your LTO-5? We have had to replace virtually ALL our LTO-5 drives due to tape head wear - what brand of tapes do you use? Agree regarding performance, in fact the limiting factor is more often non-drive, i.e. hba, or source system just can't send data fast enough. -- Message: 4 Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2011 14:35:59 -0500 From: jack.fores...@mylan.com Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Robot inquiry/poll/how well does your robot/s work? To: "Justin Piszcz" Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu, "'Lightner, Jeff'" , veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 I've used mostly the big library iron: ... removed for space... Extending this discussion, what about tape drives? We've just started using IBM LTO-5 drives earlier this year and have been blown away with their performance and capacity. Haven't had to replace any yet. Our LTO-3 drives have been solid performers regardless of manufacturer. STK T9940A/B. Nice, reliable enterprise class drives. Didn't require us to buy new tapes when moving from the A to B series. STK T1 - Bought some of these at a former employer, but left before they could be installed. Heard they were great drives. DLT/SDLT - Meh. -- Jack Forester, Jr. Sr. Data Protection Administrator Global Technology Services - AHS Mylan, Inc. 5005?Greenbag?Road Morgantown,?WV?26501 jack.fores...@mylan.com Phone: +1.304.554.6039 Cell: +1.412.805.5313 ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu == CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message and all attachments transmitted with it may contain legally privileged, proprietary and/or confidential information intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution, duplication or other use of this message and/or its attachments is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message and its attachments. Thank you. == ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Robot inquiry/poll/how well does your robot/s work?
I've used mostly the big library iron: StorageTek Powderhorn - Very reliable, EOL now, but up to 450 tape exchanges per hour, slow to inventory if it needed to scan the entire library StorageTek SL8500 - Loved the redundancy, speed and scalability. Had 3 at a former employer. One had a problem in which one of the plastic tape rack modules (the things that mount on the walls of the library and hold the tapes) was slightly warped. Occasionally, when a handbot would come speeding by and it was holding a tape at the right height, it would knock the tape out of the gripper. No complaints here. Stellar service from Sun/STK whenever we needed. StorageTek L700 - Very reliable, supported multiple types of drives, reasonably quick robotics IBM TS3100/3200 - Nice small/medium office libraries. Occasionally run into problems with the robotics and drives, but not terribly frequently. IBM support can be difficult to deal with sometimes in our locations outside of the US IBM TS3310 - Solid library, can't remember having problems with them. Robotics are slow. Decent scalability, and can be partitioned into logical libraries. Extending this discussion, what about tape drives? We've just started using IBM LTO-5 drives earlier this year and have been blown away with their performance and capacity. Haven't had to replace any yet. Our LTO-3 drives have been solid performers regardless of manufacturer. STK T9940A/B. Nice, reliable enterprise class drives. Didn't require us to buy new tapes when moving from the A to B series. STK T1 - Bought some of these at a former employer, but left before they could be installed. Heard they were great drives. DLT/SDLT - Meh. -- Jack Forester, Jr. Sr. Data Protection Administrator Global Technology Services - AHS Mylan, Inc. 5005 Greenbag Road Morgantown, WV 26501 jack.fores...@mylan.com Phone: +1.304.554.6039 Cell: +1.412.805.5313 From: "Justin Piszcz" To: "'Lightner, Jeff'" , veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Date: 12/01/2011 10:16 AM Subject:Re: [Veritas-bu] Robot inquiry/poll/how well does your robot/s work? Sent by:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Hi, So far what I've received 1 e-mail off-list and this one: Quotes = Paraphrasing. ADIC - (bought by Quantum, see Quantum) Dell - "DELL PV136T robots seemed to have a lot of problems" HP/ESL9595s - Seemed to lockup a lot and throw tapes on the floor, suffice to say these aren't sold anymore, this was 10+ years ago. HP/MSL6000s - Smaller robots worked very well, very minor/no issues at all but they only held 30-60 tapes or so.. HP - Any G3 owners here? IBM TS2900 - "Has crashed a couple of times" IBM 3584 (now TS3500) - "Only a couple of errors since 2005-2006, very stable robot." Spectra Logic - Any takers? STK/SL500 - Have had a lot of fun with caps and loading/unloading tapes, make sure you test when you install one of these units, often there can be parts of plastic that are not cut properly so there can be cap errors, related issues. For the most part, they work fine; however, a lot more maintenance goes into maintaining lots of smaller robots and the cost of SL500s price per slot (compared to larger ones) is high but it fits into a standard rack. STK/L700s - I find that the type of drives can also seem to impact how well the robot works, in terms of tapes getting stuck, also different drives can use different bezel designs, this can also affect reliability. I've used L700s at a some companies and find these (when paired with IBM LTO-4 drives) the robot itself is typically very reliable; however, with HP + LTO-2 that was not the case, lots of errors, robot lockups etc. Then there is the redundancy issue, they have two PSU's, the robot itself will stay online (?) but you will lose 1/2 the tape drives, not an issue though if you have good/reliable power. STK/SL8500s - Redundant, reliable all around best STK/Sun/Oracle option for enterprises, SL500 otherwise. SL3000s are nice as well (haven't seen one up close) but they are not nearly as redundant as an SL8500 and cost around the same when fully expanded. STK/Sun/Oracle - Curious of others' reviews of the robots mentioned above. Qualstar - "Possible issues with new robots but once the root problem is fixed, no further issues." Quantum - Scalar i6000 " almost no issues with the robot itself, minor issue with cleaning tapes." This is great info, only ones that are left are the HP G3 series (similar to HP ESL9595s) and Spectra Logic series of robots. Anyone out there using those/or have comments on what I have written? Are there any manufacturers I have missed? Justin. -Original Message- From: Lightner, Jeff [mailto:jlight...@water.com] Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2011 9:34 AM To: Justin Piszcz; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu]
Re: [Veritas-bu] Status 84 - plugin error
DataDomain has also recommended that we upgrade to DDOS 5.0.2.3 for the exact same reason you cite. It's good to get confirmation from someone that this could more or less resolve the problem. Thanks for everyone's feedback...it is much appreciated! -- Jack Forester, Jr. Sr. Data Protection Administrator Global Technology Services - AHS Mylan, Inc. 5005 Greenbag Road Morgantown, WV 26501 jack.fores...@mylan.com Phone: +1.304.554.6039 Cell: +1.412.805.5313 From: "rsavage" To: VERITAS-BU@MAILMAN.ENG.AUBURN.EDU Date: 10/20/2011 04:00 PM Subject:[Veritas-bu] Status 84 - plugin error Sent by:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu We had the same problem, media write errors. Seems to happen with long running jobs most of the time. We ugpraded the Data domain code and OST code which increased the timeouts to 3hrs from data domain. We also noticed are long running jobs in which most of the 84 errors were coming from were Window 2008 or Windows 2008 R2. there is a known hotfix from Symantec on this issue. Here is the link for this: http://www.symantec.com/business/support/index?page=content&id=TECH150081 We upgraded to the following: DD670 5.0.1.7-250021 OST plugin 2.3.2.0 NBU - 7.0.1 Once we upgraded to the current versions above and applied the hotfixes we now get a media write error 84, maybe once a week and at times we will go for weeks with not issues. I am to believe the OST plugin and/or NBU 7.0.1 still has a bug but neither vendor has a compelte fix. +-- |This was sent by rich.sav...@bcbsne.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 == CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message and all attachments transmitted with it may contain legally privileged, proprietary and/or confidential information intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution, duplication or other use of this message and/or its attachments is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message and its attachments. Thank you. == ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Status 84 - plugin error
We've been having jobs fail with a status 84 seemingly at random. These jobs are being written to a DataDomain 890 configured as an OST target for the backups. Both of the media servers in the environment (one AIX and one Windows) are seeing these failures. Since NetBackup is reporting a plugin error, we've engaged DataDomain technical support in addition to Symantec technical support. These are the messages we see in the job details: 10/18/2011 17:52:31 - Critical bptm (pid=30605402) image write failed: error 2060046: plugin error 10/18/2011 17:52:31 - Critical bptm (pid=30605402) sts_get_image_prop failed: error 2060046: plugin error 10/18/2011 17:52:31 - Critical bptm (pid=30605402) image delete failed: error 2060046: plugin error 10/18/2011 17:52:38 - Error bptm (pid=30605402) cannot write image to disk, Invalid argument 10/18/2011 17:52:38 - Info bptm (pid=30605402) EXITING with status 84 <-- Other vitals: NetBackup version: 7.1.0.2 OST Plugin: 2.3.1.0 DDOS: 5.0.0.7-226726 Anyone else have a similar problem? -- Jack Forester, Jr. Sr. Data Protection Administrator Global Technology Services - AHS Mylan, Inc. 5005 Greenbag Road Morgantown, WV 26501 jack.fores...@mylan.com Phone: +1.304.554.6039 Cell: +1.412.805.5313 == CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message and all attachments transmitted with it may contain legally privileged, proprietary and/or confidential information intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution, duplication or other use of this message and/or its attachments is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message and its attachments. Thank you. == ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Recovering W2k8 servers with EFI partition
We've been wrestling with recoveries of Windows 2k8 servers that have EFI partitions. We are finally able to back them up, but we are unable to perform a full recovery. We're using nearly identical hardware for the recovery server and the restores all complete, but the server won't boot afterwards. We've followed the instructions in the technote for recovering Windows 2008 servers without BMR, but no dice. The client is at NBU 6.5.6 with the EEB installed to allow it to back up the EFI partition. We've run 'w2koption -backup -efi_boot_enabled 1' on the client, and we get status 0 backups for all streams for the client. Does anyone have any experience with performing system recoveries of this type? We routinely do test recoveries of other servers, but the ones with EFI have us scratching our heads. Is it possible to do a physical to virtual restore of a server with an EFI partition? My gut tells me that the answer to that question is "no". -- Jack Forester, Jr. Sr. Data Protection Administrator Global Technology Services - AHS Mylan, Inc. 5005 Greenbag Road Morgantown, WV 26501 jack.fores...@mylan.com Phone: +1.304.554.6039 Cell: +1.412.805.5313 == CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message and all attachments transmitted with it may contain legally privileged, proprietary and/or confidential information intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution, duplication or other use of this message and/or its attachments is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message and its attachments. Thank you. == ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] PureDisk vs. DataDomain
We are currently using PureDisk and NBU 5000 as well as DataDomain in our many far-flung backup environments. Each one has its place. One thing to remember that with the NBU7 deduplication or the NBU5000. You need an additional per-TB deduplication option license for each TB of data that is being protected, not the amount of disk space that is actually configured. That license can be pretty pricey. Personally, I'm opposed to per-TB or tiered licensing in general. I can see needing a license to enable the deduplication capabilities in NBU, but not one to use an appliance we already paid for. In a previous job, I gave our Symantec reps a hard time about having to pay a per-TB license for our VTLs asking them what value that license provided us when the real value came from the VTL we purchased. It all seems like a money grab on Symantec's part. Sorry about getting off on a rant there...that's a hot-button topic for me. So far, we are quite happy with the deduplication provided by NBU7 and Puredisk. Setup of the NBU5000 is a piece of cake. I'll agree with a previous poster and say that the DataDomains give us better overall deduplication and throughput. My overall impressions so far is that the DataDomain is more enterprise oriented while PureDisk and NBU5000 aren't quite at that point yet. -- Jack Forester, Jr. Sr. Data Protection Administrator Global Technology Services - AHS Mylan, Inc. 5005 Greenbag Road Morgantown, WV 26501 jack.fores...@mylan.com Phone: +1.304.554.6039 Cell: +1.412.805.5313 From: "Pat McDonald" To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Cc: "Pat McDonald" Date: 02/14/2011 10:52 AM Subject:Re: [Veritas-bu] PureDisk vs. DataDomain Sent by:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Hi Mark, You were right to explore lower cost alternative solutions for your deduplication needs. As a long-time Data Domain customer you have firsthand experience on how expensive those solutions can be. It is unfortunate however that at the time you were evaluating a newer, lower cost dedupe solution, you were unable to see and experience the full potential of the “end-to-end deduplication” capabilities currently available with NetBackup 7 and our new line of NetBackup 5000 deduplication appliances. The resulting power of our approach gives you the choice and flexibility to deploy deduplication at the source, at the media server, and a simple, easy to deploy, and yet highly scalable target global deduplication appliance as well. Symantec NetBackup 7 Deduplication allows you to simultaneously deploy and configure both source and target based dedupe with-in the same infrastructure and with-out incurring exorbitant costs or deploying incompatible solutions. This is simply not possible with an EMC deduplication solution. You must choose between two incompatible solutions, Data Domain and Avamar, both of which can be 2x-5x more expensive than the Symantec Deduplication solution. NetBackup 7 has deduplication built right in. It is easily configured at the source or at the media server with just a backup policy settings. Simply turn it on and you will quickly see the significant performance gains from reducing network loads and reduced backup time in either virtual or physical environments. The Symantec 5000 line of deduplication appliances can also make your life very simple.As you mentioned earlier, you needed to figure out which Data Domain appliances you needed, most likely the minimum to keep the costs down. In each case, once they are full, you will need to EOL those units and buy larger, more expensive units as they are incompatible and cannot be connected to create a larger global deduplication pool. Pretty expensive. The new NetBackup 5000 appliances can be individually added (mix/match) and scaled to meet the needs of just about any enterprise data center. The beauty of this approach is the ability to add more and larger appliances to your global pool as they become available to create even larger global pools as your data continues to grow. Again, tough to do with either Data Domain or Avamar. With the rapidly evolving changes in IT infrastructures, the ability to easily select a dedupe configuration that best fits your needs today while letting you tune it for maximum performance, whether virtual or physical, and then be able to easily change it without throwing any of it away, I think would be of tremendous value to you and your organization. We would hope that when your Data Domain is reaching its EOL, you would give Symantec the opportunity to demonstrate the power of its complete deduplication solution, and show you how we can help you to better manage your storage dollars. Thanks! Pat McDonald Principal Systems Engineer Symantec Corporation From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu [ mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Mark Glazer
Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 5000 Series replication?
I'm doing replication from a remote MSDP to a PureDisk server (essentially a build it yourself NBU5000) using optimized duplication with no problems so far. Been running for about 6 - 7 weeks now. I've got an NBU5000 in our datacenter waiting to be unboxed and installed for our North America environment. It's working pretty well so far. Dedup rates are in the mid 90% range. Presently backing up and duplicating 1.8TB of full backups on a weekly basis and about 400GB of incrementals per week. Replication occurs from a remote site across a 20Mb/s WAN link. The distance is approx 930Km. The initial seeding of the Puredisk server took about 9 days, but once that finished, the weekly full backups, from start to all replication complete takes under 12 hours. This is a NetBackup 7 environment. -- Jack Forester, Jr. Sr. Data Protection Administrator Global Technology Services - AHS Mylan, Inc. 5005 Greenbag Road Morgantown, WV 26501 jack.fores...@mylan.com Phone: +1.304.554.6039 Cell: +1.412.805.5313 From: scott.geo...@parker.com To: VERITAS-BU@MAILMAN.ENG.AUBURN.EDU Date: 01/30/2011 12:05 AM Subject:Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 5000 Series replication? Sent by:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu We are about to do a proof of concept of one in a couple of weeks. I will post the outcome. I would really like Oracle to release Solaris 11 with zfs deduplication. When that happens, its going to drive down the pricing in the market. In the mean time, I am in the market too, and shopping around. From: sfischer To: VERITAS-BU@MAILMAN.ENG.AUBURN.EDU Date: 01/29/2011 01:10 PM Subject:[Veritas-bu] NetBackup 5000 Series replication? Sent by:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu We are in the market for a new backup/replication system. We are looking at using NetBackup 7 with a NetBackup appliance, probably the 5020. Is anyone using a NBU 5000 series device for replication? How do you like it? How was the setup? How much data do you backup? After dedup how much data do you replicate? Do you replicate to a remote site? If so, what is the distance and what kind of network are you using? Thanks in advance. +-- |This was sent by scott.fisc...@alliedbuilding.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 "PLEASE NOTE: The preceding information may be confidential or privileged. It only should be used or disseminated for the purpose of conducting business with Parker. If you are not an intended recipient, please notify the sender by replying to this message and then delete the information from your system. Thank you for your cooperation." ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu == CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message and all attachments transmitted with it may contain legally privileged, proprietary and/or confidential information intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution, duplication or other use of this message and/or its attachments is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message and its attachments. Thank you. == ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Performance tuning Windows 2008 client
When I'm doing my tests, I'm running the job only on a single client. I noticed some high latencies on the guest using the built in tools when running a test job yesterday, so I'm going to pursue your ideas further. Thanks for your feedback! -- Jack Forester, Jr. Sr. Data Protection Administrator Global Technology Services - AHS Mylan, Inc. 5005 Greenbag Road Morgantown, WV 26501 jack.fores...@mylan.com Phone: +1.304.554.6039 Cell: +1.412.805.5313 "Martin, Jonathan" Sent by: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu 07/07/2010 02:29 PM To jack.fores...@mylan.com, veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu cc Subject Re: [Veritas-bu] Performance tuning Windows 2008 client Are you hitting multiple VMs simultaneously on the same datastore? Is the speed better when you only run one backup at a time? We’ve identified serious performance issues related to requesting to many random I/Os from a raid group as the same time. Backing up multiple VMs and rebooting multiple VMs on the same datastore can cause serious latency spikes. Latency is a bit tricky to track down, but if you open the VC, increase metrics gather to maximum, and select the host the VM is on you can see the latency for any given lun. Anything sustained higher than 20ms is a performance problem waiting to happen. Ideally we shoot for <10ms. Let me know if you need more information or help tracking down these metrics. -Jonathan From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu [mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of jack.fores...@mylan.com Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2010 1:56 PM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Performance tuning Windows 2008 client > Do these contain lots and lots of little files? If so, have you considered FlashBackup? The backup is 19GB over 35,000 files. That's pretty typical. It took 17 hours to run. That's not typical. We hope to upgrade to NBU7 later this year and take advantage of the new features for backing up VMs > Do you have enough memory on these guests. We've seen some issues where one of our VMware admins decided to give all of the new guests VERY little memory, forgetting that after he provisioned the guest he was supposed to increase it to a reasonable size. The guests all have 4GB memory. > If you do network exerciser from the guest to the media server, what sort of performance do you get? For example, have you tried something like an FTP or a simple file copy directly from the guest to the media server? I copied a folder containing 215MB of files from the guest to the media server. It took nearly two minutes. A lot slower than I'd have expected for a 1Gb LAN, so to have a basis of comparason, I copied 206MB of files from a 2k8 server running on bare metal to the same media server, and that copy took about half the time. Not stellar performance, but still better than the VM. This is all repeatable. What I've observed is that at the start of the backup, we get good performance, but it slows after 20 minutes or so. The activity also seems to happen in bursts with periods of good speeds followed by periods of poor performance. I'm a UNIX administrator by trade, so troubleshooting Windows issues is a bit foreign to me. -- Jack Forester, Jr. Sr. Data Protection Administrator Global Technology Services - AHS Mylan, Inc. 5005 Greenbag Road Morgantown, WV 26501 jack.fores...@mylan.com Phone: +1.304.554.6039 Cell: +1.412.805.5313 "Ed Wilts" Sent by: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu 07/07/2010 10:50 AM To jack.fores...@mylan.com cc veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject Re: [Veritas-bu] Performance tuning Windows 2008 client On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 9:28 AM, wrote: We're observing some significant performance issues with some of our Windows 2008 SP2 clients. Backing up to a DD880 VTL, one client in particular is running at just over 300KB/sec. Others are running 2-3MB/sec. The clients in question are all virtual machines running on VMWare ESX 3.5.0 238493. Our Windows 2008 clients running on bare metal are performing well. Our NetBackup environment is version 6.5.3 on the master/media server and the client. We've tried tuning the net buffer size, but that made no difference. Are there other things we can try? Do these contain lots and lots of little files? If so, have you considered FlashBackup? Do you have enough memory on these guests. We've seen some issues where one of our VMware admins decided to give all of the new guests VERY little memory, forgetting that after he provisioned the guest he was supposed to increase it to a reasonable size. If you do network exerciser from the guest to the media server, what sort of performance do you get? For example, have you tried something like an FTP or a simple file copy directly
Re: [Veritas-bu] Performance tuning Windows 2008 client
> Do these contain lots and lots of little files? If so, have you considered FlashBackup? The backup is 19GB over 35,000 files. That's pretty typical. It took 17 hours to run. That's not typical. We hope to upgrade to NBU7 later this year and take advantage of the new features for backing up VMs > Do you have enough memory on these guests. We've seen some issues where one of our VMware admins decided to give all of the new guests VERY little memory, forgetting that after he provisioned the guest he was supposed to increase it to a reasonable size. The guests all have 4GB memory. > If you do network exerciser from the guest to the media server, what sort of performance do you get? For example, have you tried something like an FTP or a simple file copy directly from the guest to the media server? I copied a folder containing 215MB of files from the guest to the media server. It took nearly two minutes. A lot slower than I'd have expected for a 1Gb LAN, so to have a basis of comparason, I copied 206MB of files from a 2k8 server running on bare metal to the same media server, and that copy took about half the time. Not stellar performance, but still better than the VM. This is all repeatable. What I've observed is that at the start of the backup, we get good performance, but it slows after 20 minutes or so. The activity also seems to happen in bursts with periods of good speeds followed by periods of poor performance. I'm a UNIX administrator by trade, so troubleshooting Windows issues is a bit foreign to me. -- Jack Forester, Jr. Sr. Data Protection Administrator Global Technology Services - AHS Mylan, Inc. 5005 Greenbag Road Morgantown, WV 26501 jack.fores...@mylan.com Phone: +1.304.554.6039 Cell: +1.412.805.5313 "Ed Wilts" Sent by: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu 07/07/2010 10:50 AM To jack.fores...@mylan.com cc veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject Re: [Veritas-bu] Performance tuning Windows 2008 client On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 9:28 AM, wrote: We're observing some significant performance issues with some of our Windows 2008 SP2 clients. Backing up to a DD880 VTL, one client in particular is running at just over 300KB/sec. Others are running 2-3MB/sec. The clients in question are all virtual machines running on VMWare ESX 3.5.0 238493. Our Windows 2008 clients running on bare metal are performing well. Our NetBackup environment is version 6.5.3 on the master/media server and the client. We've tried tuning the net buffer size, but that made no difference. Are there other things we can try? Do these contain lots and lots of little files? If so, have you considered FlashBackup? Do you have enough memory on these guests. We've seen some issues where one of our VMware admins decided to give all of the new guests VERY little memory, forgetting that after he provisioned the guest he was supposed to increase it to a reasonable size. If you do network exerciser from the guest to the media server, what sort of performance do you get? For example, have you tried something like an FTP or a simple file copy directly from the guest to the media server? .../Ed Ed Wilts, RHCE, BCFP, BCSD, SCSP, SCSE ewi...@ewilts.org Linkedin We have a case open with Symantec, but I thought I'd check here to see if anyone else has run into this issue. -- Jack Forester, Jr. Sr. Data Protection Administrator Global Technology Services - AHS Mylan, Inc. 5005 Greenbag Road Morgantown, WV 26501 jack.fores...@mylan.com Phone: +1.304.554.6039 Cell: +1.412.805.5313 == CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message and all attachments transmitted with it may contain legally privileged, proprietary and/or confidential information intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution, duplication or other use of this message and/or its attachments is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message and its attachments. Thank you. == ___ 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 == CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message and all attachments transmitted with it may contain legally privileged, proprietary and/or confidential information intend
[Veritas-bu] Performance tuning Windows 2008 client
Greetings all, We're observing some significant performance issues with some of our Windows 2008 SP2 clients. Backing up to a DD880 VTL, one client in particular is running at just over 300KB/sec. Others are running 2-3MB/sec. The clients in question are all virtual machines running on VMWare ESX 3.5.0 238493. Our Windows 2008 clients running on bare metal are performing well. Our NetBackup environment is version 6.5.3 on the master/media server and the client. We've tried tuning the net buffer size, but that made no difference. Are there other things we can try? We have a case open with Symantec, but I thought I'd check here to see if anyone else has run into this issue. -- Jack Forester, Jr. Sr. Data Protection Administrator Global Technology Services - AHS Mylan, Inc. 5005 Greenbag Road Morgantown, WV 26501 jack.fores...@mylan.com Phone: +1.304.554.6039 Cell: +1.412.805.5313 == CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message and all attachments transmitted with it may contain legally privileged, proprietary and/or confidential information intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution, duplication or other use of this message and/or its attachments is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message and its attachments. Thank you. == ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Converting stand-alone Master to clustered Master
It's been almost a year since I've had to deal with a clustered master server, so I may not remember some of the details, but in addition to knowing the virtual name of the cluster, NBU also knows the host names of every node in the cluster. How NBU dealt with a cluster changed in either 5.1 or 6.0 (I'm leaning toward 6.0 here). I once wanted to move a clustered master server to a new cluster by setting up the new cluster while the old one was still running, etc, etc, etc (tedious details omitted). I contacted Veritas support, and they said that even the hostnames of the nodes had to remain the same. So, I'm guessing there's some major under-the-hood work that would have to be done to do that kind of conversion. Even EMM knows about the individual nodes in the cluster, and it keeps track of which node is the active node in the cluster. I'm guessing that even building a new cluster from scratch and then doing a catalog recovery wouldn't work because of this. -- Jack Forester, Jr. Senior Recovery Administrator Global Technology Services - AHS Mylan, Inc. 1000 Hampton Center Morgantown, WV 26505 jack.fores...@mylan.com Phone: +1.304.554.6039 Cell: +1.412.805.5313 "Donaldson, Mark" Sent by: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu 10/13/2009 05:19 PM To "Bryan Bahnmiller" cc veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject Re: [Veritas-bu] Converting stand-alone Master to clustered Master The goal is to get off of the aging V880 and onto a cheaper Linux platform. At the same time, we've had a couple high-profile hardware failures in the past couple months and, since the hardware is cheap (and the VCS license is "free" thanks to our site license), putting in a cluster seems a way to add reliability for the cost of a $5000 x86 box. I don't intend to rename the master server, I'll move the name and, I thought, make it the HA name for the pair - thus getting around the infamous "can't rename the master server" problem. That's why I was thinking this would be easy to pull off. I don't know if the company will spring for $15k worth of services, though. Kinda doubles the cost of the whole project. From: Bryan Bahnmiller [mailto:bbahnmil...@dtcc.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 1:58 PM To: Donaldson, Mark Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Converting stand-alone Master to clustered Master Mark, Ugh... Don't envy that task. A few comments. The master server has to run on the virtual name (relocatable IP and dns name.) This name and the names of the individual nodes are in the EMM db. If you kept the name of the current master as your virtual name, it should be a simpler task. Also, the agent is very intrusive. (Especially on Windows.) There are agent options that can only be set via the bpclusterutil command. That tells me that the agent is not all that, what, conforming? At the conference I went to, a Symantec employee was asked why changing the name of the backup server is not supported. He said that the name of the NBU master server is in 14 different places on Windows servers and 11 places on Unix servers. And the names in the different places have to be changed in the correct order. One mistake and nothing works. I sat in on some very interesting discussions about NBU HA. What are you trying to accomplish? Most of the people I talked with agreed that the main thing HA will give you is the capability of doing server maintenance with minimal impact. Most hardware now is pretty reliable. When was the last time you had a nic or hba fail? When the server fails over, all backups stop. After a failover, you will still have to clear out tape drives, restart backups and so on. The only currently allowed HA configuration is active/passive. So you do have one server sitting there idling, waiting for the other server to fail over. Also, if you have the disk mirrored with VxVM, you'll have to see if that is supported with the Linux agent for failover too. Bryan "Donaldson, Mark" Sent by: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu 10/13/2009 02:32 PM To cc Subject [Veritas-bu] Converting stand-alone Master to clustered Master Page 14 of the NB High Availability guide: = NetBackup does not support the conversion of an existing non-failover NetBackup server to a failover NetBackup server. Contact Symantec Enterprise Technical Support. = Huh? Should be easy, I'd think. Why would I need Tech Support? Has anyone done this? BTW: also converting from Solaris to Linux at the same time if I can pull this off... -Mark ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu _ DTCC DISCLAIMER: T
[Veritas-bu] NetBackup for Oracle 6.5.3
Hi all, I'm getting prepared to take the 6.5 leap (from 6.0, so not that big of a deal), but I'm wondering about UNIX database add-ons and release updates. We're using the oracle agent, and I see that there is no 6.5.3 for the Oracle agent, only 6.5.2. My understanding is that these add-ons must be at the same level as the client. Did anything change in 6.5 so that the add-ons can be at a lower patch level than the client (6.5, 6.5.1, or 6.5.2 agent with a 6.5.3 client) or are we going to be stuck at a 6.5.2 client if we want to use the Oracle agent? -- Jack Forester, Jr. Senior Recovery Administrator Mylan 1000 Hampton Center Morgantown, WV 26505 jack.fores...@mylan.com Phone: +1.304.554.6039 Cell: +1.412.805.5313 == CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message and all attachments transmitted with it may contain legally privileged, proprietary and/or confidential information intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution, duplication or other use of this message and/or its attachments is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message and its attachments. Thank you. == ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] What is best approach to share one ACSLS library ?
Have you considered partitioning the library and treating it as two separate libraries? -- Jack Forester, Jr. Senior Recovery Administrator Mylan 1000 Hampton Center Morgantown, WV 26505 jack.fores...@mylan.com Phone: +1.304.554.6039 anil.mau...@sanofi-aventis.com Sent by: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu 03/18/2009 11:22 AM To veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu cc Subject [Veritas-bu] What is best approach to share one ACSLS library ? Hi I have one big library ( 8500 ) controlled by ACSLS. We have two site site A ( one master and many media server all running on 5.5.x have small library ( DLT)(NO ACSLS here) ) and site B ( one master and many media server all running 6.5.3 with big library 8500 on ACSLS ). I need to start using big 8500 library for both site. What is best approach and how should i acheive this goal ? THX ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu == CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message and all attachments transmitted with it may contain legally privileged, proprietary and/or confidential information intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution, duplication or other use of this message and/or its attachments is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message and its attachments. Thank you. == ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Standalone to Custered migration
Earlier this year, I replaced the master server cluster at a previous employer. We went with the same vendor, namely Sun, but while the old servers were still in operation I built the new servers in a cluster. According to Veritas support, even the node names of the nodes in the new cluster had to remain the same, so now that I think of it, going from non-clustered to clustered in this way probably wouldn't work. The EMM DB _does_ contian information about the NetBackup cluster and which of the nodes is active. There's probably some magic that can be done on the EMM DB with nbemmcmd to update it with cluster information, but Symantec is probably the only one who knows the incantation. -- Jack Forester, Jr. Senior Recovery Administrator Mylan 1000 Hampton Center Morgantown, WV 26505 jack.fores...@mylan.com Phone: +1.304.554.6039 "spaldam" Sent by: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu 12/23/2008 12:08 AM Please respond to VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu To VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu cc Subject [Veritas-bu] Standalone to Custered migration Jack.Forester wrote: > I seem to remember reading in the HA guide that going from a non-clustered server to a clustered server is not supported. Doesn't mean it's not possible, though. Marianne's suggestion of building the server as a cluster, then doing a bprecover sounds like it might work. Just make sure you make the cluster name the same as the name of the original standalone. You definitely want to read the HA guide. What clustering software are you using? You are correct: >From the “Veritas NetBackup™ High Availability Administrator’s Guide” (NetBackup_Administorator_HighAvalability.pdf) document: Page 14: “NetBackup does not support the conversion of an existing non-failover NetBackup server to a failover NetBackup server. Contact Symantec Enterprise Technical Support.” In other words, this requires consulting services. I guess that's what you get for not reading the first couple of chapters because you think they are just a bunch of fluff. We've tried doing the recovery after configuring it in the cluster. The problem at that point is that NetBackup is not aware that it's in a cluster, which causes a big problem with the device configurations. We are using the latest version of VCS, so it's definitely supported, just apparently not with using our old EMM database. Any ideas on how to remedy this situation, or when it will be supported? I really don't want to have to re-inventory or loose 7 years worth of old tapes. Maybe we can get one of our DBA's to crack open the Sybase Database and find a solution to our problem? +-- |This was sent by spal...@spaldam.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 == CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message and all attachments transmitted with it may contain legally privileged, proprietary and/or confidential information intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution, duplication or other use of this message and/or its attachments is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message and its attachments. Thank you. == ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Standalone to Custered migration
I seem to remember reading in the HA guide that going from a non-clustered server to a clustered server is not supported. Doesn't mean it's not possible, though. Marianne's suggestion of building the server as a cluster, then doing a bprecover sounds like it might work. Just make sure you make the cluster name the same as the name of the original standalone. You definitely want to read the HA guide. What clustering software are you using? -- Jack Forester, Jr. Senior Recovery Administrator Mylan 1000 Hampton Center Morgantown, WV 26505 jack.fores...@mylan.com Phone: +1.304.554.6039 "spaldam" Sent by: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu 12/22/2008 09:27 AM Please respond to VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu To VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu cc Subject [Veritas-bu] Standalone to Custered migration We've tested doing it in the order you described as well, but after the recovery the cluster configuration within NetBackup gets messed up as netbackup looses any knowledge of it being clustered. Once again it appears to be because the EMM database gets overwritten; this time with the recovered database that is configured for a standalone configuration. There's got to be something we are missing; if someone has actually gotten it to work before. Has anyone gotten this to work before? +-- |This was sent by spal...@spaldam.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 == CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message and all attachments transmitted with it may contain legally privileged, proprietary and/or confidential information intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution, duplication or other use of this message and/or its attachments is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message and its attachments. Thank you. == ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Status 50
Greetings... We're starting to experience a large number of backup jobs ending with a status code of 50. Every now and then I used to see backups end with a 50, but it was usually due to someone rebooting a media server in the middle of a backup. The ones I'm seeing I can confirm that the server was not rebooted. However, it appears that the backup is running to completion before getting the 50. Backup times, number of files backed up, and kbytes are consistent from when the backup completes normally. After digging into the bpsched log (the only one I had active at the time) I do see things that suggest that whatever causes the error happens after the backup completes. I never see "EXIT STATUS 50" in the bpsched log, but I do see "EXIT STATUS 0" in the log associated with the bpsched job for the job that gets a 50. The images on media shows a backup image, and the backup and restore GUI shows files that were backed up. I hope my description was coherent. We're doing the standard stuff...enabling bptm, bpbkar, etc logs and hoping the error occurs so we can capture something in the act. I was wondering if anyone here has seen this before, and whay you did to correct it. We're running 5.1MP6. Right now, we're seeing this only on our test systems, but I how we can get a handle on it before (if) we see it on our production side. -- Jack L. Forester, Jr. UNIX Systems Administrator, Stf Lockheed Martin Information Technology (304) 625-3946 ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Fiber Drive Question
We've been running 9940B drives for nearly 3 years now, and I've never heard of a table of addresses to control access to the drive. I've been through the menus on the drive and looked through the drive manual and never saw a reference to such a "feature". Are you having a problem at this moment? Can you provide more information about your setup and the problem? Erik Strom wrote: >Has anyone heard about a table of wwn/addresses located inside of a 9940B or >similiar fiber tape drives? I heard a rumor but cannot find any documentation >that said,. > >The tape drive has a table of addresses that it will allow read/write access to >the tape drive. There is only 16 slots available for these entries. This means >that in order for a 17th media server to access this drive that it must wait >for one of the existing 16 to drop out of the table. This is suppose to be the >explaination as to why tape drives seem to disappear or become no longer >functional to a media server. > >I've heard stranger things but I wanted to see if this is an urban myth or if >someone can supply me with documentation about this. > > > > >Need a quick answer? Get one in minutes from people who know. >Ask your question on www.Answers.yahoo.com >___ >Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu >http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu > > -- Jack L. Forester, Jr. UNIX Systems Administrator, Stf Lockheed Martin Information Technology (304) 625-3946 ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Upgrade Questions
I'll also add that the upgrade from 4.5 to 5.1 - especially if your master server is clustered - is not a simple, straightforward upgrade, either. But the upgrade to 6.0 sounds like it will be more challenging. We're preparing for a 5.1 -> 6.0 upgrade here. Justin Piszcz wrote: >I would read the release notes from 4.5 -> 5.1. >Then I would not only read the release notes for 5.1 -> 6.0, I would also >read the "Upgrading to 6.0" PDF document written by Symantec, it has many >useful tips that will save you many hours of misery :) > >Justin. > >On Mon, 29 Jan 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > >>Justin, >> >>any thing I should look out for? especially going from 5.1 to 6.0? or is it >>pretty straightforward? >> >>Thanks >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>Chris Costa >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>- >>This transmission may contain information that is privileged, >>confidential, legally privileged, and/or exempt from disclosure >>under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you >>are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or >>use of the information contained herein (including any reliance >>thereon) is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Although this transmission and >>any attachments are believed to be free of any virus or other >>defect that might affect any computer system into which it is >>received and opened, it is the responsibility of the recipient to >>ensure that it is virus free and no responsibility is accepted by >>JPMorgan Chase & Co., its subsidiaries and affiliates, as >>applicable, for any loss or damage arising in any way from its use. >>If you received this transmission in error, please immediately >>contact the sender and destroy the material in its entirety, >>whether in electronic or hard copy format. Thank you. >> >> >> >___ >Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu >http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu > > -- Jack L. Forester, Jr. UNIX Systems Administrator, Stf Lockheed Martin Information Technology (304) 625-3946 ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup and New Daylight Saving Time Rules
Good point. I used to admin an AS/400 way back in the day (V1R3) and I had to remember to reset the clock at the beginning and end of DST. I'd hope that by now IBM would have made that automatic. Jeff Lightner wrote: >It's probably because Java is advertised as being platform independent. >If you had a compile for an OS that didn't do DST (OS400 maybe?) it >would be nice if the Java did. However for most of us it's a bit of a >pain. I wasn't even aware of this Java TZ stuff until we got the notice >from HP sometime back that specifically mentioned Java. > >-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jack >Forester, Jr. >Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 2:03 PM >To: Veritas List >Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup and New Daylight Saving Time Rules > >I guess I didn't phrase my question very well, as we are testing the >Java update as well. I wrote a little perl script so I could identify >all of the installed JREs on my servers. Any time we do patches or >updates, I always worry that we've overlooked something small but >critical that will break things in a major way. I tend to follow the >philosophy that if it ain't broke, don't fix it. > >I wonder why Sun gave Java the ability to do DST rather than using the >functionality of the underlying OS. > >Mike L. Varney wrote: > > > >>Sun distibutes Java separately from the Solaris OS patches - - you need >> >> >to > > >>go to java.sun.com and download the newer JRE / JDK and install it. >> >> >It's > > >>actually very easy to do. >> >>I believe what Jack's asking though is if the Java update is necessary, >> >> >as > > >>updating Java on a server can have other impacts, especially if there's >> >> >an > > >>Application Server on it. As far as I know, the Java components are >> >> >only > > >>the Admin GUI and the Backup & Restore GUI. The rest of NetBackup is >>distubuted in binary form. >> >>That being said, I've always kept our JREs up to date, especially on >> >> >those > > >>mission critical servers. >> >>-- M >> >> >> >> >>"Jeff Lightner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>01/10/2007 12:44 PM >> >>To >>"Jack Forester, Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Veritas List" >> >>cc >> >>Subject >>Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup and New Daylight Saving Time Rules >> >> >> >> >> >> >>HP when it sent notification for the OS patches also sent notification >>for the need to update Java including a TZupdater tool for HP-UX. >>Surprising they'd have a way to do the update and Sun who wrote Java >>wouldn't. >> >>-Original Message- >>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jack >>Forester, Jr. >>Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 12:12 PM >>To: Veritas List >>Subject: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup and New Daylight Saving Time Rules >> >>This isn't something I've seen discussed here in recent memory, but >> >> >it's > > >>something we're working on right now. The new Daylight Saving Time >>rules for the US take effect this year and we're wondering if anybody >>has investigated the impact to NetBackup. We've been testing our OS >>patches and they appear to work, but Sun brought something to our >>attention -- Java does its own DST conversion and needs to be updated. >>Veritas has assured us that NetBackup will be fine as long as we have >>the OS patches installed, but I'm curious about the bits done in Java. >>My feeling is that the Java stuff doesn't do any date/time critical >>operations and will probably be fine even if we don't update the JRE. >> >>Any thoughts? >> >> >> >> >> > > > > -- Jack L. Forester, Jr. UNIX Systems Administrator, Stf Lockheed Martin Information Technology (304) 625-3946 ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup and New Daylight Saving Time Rules
I guess I didn't phrase my question very well, as we are testing the Java update as well. I wrote a little perl script so I could identify all of the installed JREs on my servers. Any time we do patches or updates, I always worry that we've overlooked something small but critical that will break things in a major way. I tend to follow the philosophy that if it ain't broke, don't fix it. I wonder why Sun gave Java the ability to do DST rather than using the functionality of the underlying OS. Mike L. Varney wrote: >Sun distibutes Java separately from the Solaris OS patches - - you need to >go to java.sun.com and download the newer JRE / JDK and install it. It's >actually very easy to do. > >I believe what Jack's asking though is if the Java update is necessary, as >updating Java on a server can have other impacts, especially if there's an >Application Server on it. As far as I know, the Java components are only >the Admin GUI and the Backup & Restore GUI. The rest of NetBackup is >distubuted in binary form. > >That being said, I've always kept our JREs up to date, especially on those >mission critical servers. > >-- M > > > > >"Jeff Lightner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >01/10/2007 12:44 PM > >To >"Jack Forester, Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Veritas List" > >cc > >Subject >Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup and New Daylight Saving Time Rules > > > > > > >HP when it sent notification for the OS patches also sent notification >for the need to update Java including a TZupdater tool for HP-UX. >Surprising they'd have a way to do the update and Sun who wrote Java >wouldn't. > >-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jack >Forester, Jr. >Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 12:12 PM >To: Veritas List >Subject: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup and New Daylight Saving Time Rules > >This isn't something I've seen discussed here in recent memory, but it's > >something we're working on right now. The new Daylight Saving Time >rules for the US take effect this year and we're wondering if anybody >has investigated the impact to NetBackup. We've been testing our OS >patches and they appear to work, but Sun brought something to our >attention -- Java does its own DST conversion and needs to be updated. >Veritas has assured us that NetBackup will be fine as long as we have >the OS patches installed, but I'm curious about the bits done in Java. >My feeling is that the Java stuff doesn't do any date/time critical >operations and will probably be fine even if we don't update the JRE. > >Any thoughts? > > > -- Jack L. Forester, Jr. UNIX Systems Administrator, Stf Lockheed Martin Information Technology (304) 625-3946 ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] NetBackup and New Daylight Saving Time Rules
This isn't something I've seen discussed here in recent memory, but it's something we're working on right now. The new Daylight Saving Time rules for the US take effect this year and we're wondering if anybody has investigated the impact to NetBackup. We've been testing our OS patches and they appear to work, but Sun brought something to our attention -- Java does its own DST conversion and needs to be updated. Veritas has assured us that NetBackup will be fine as long as we have the OS patches installed, but I'm curious about the bits done in Java. My feeling is that the Java stuff doesn't do any date/time critical operations and will probably be fine even if we don't update the JRE. Any thoughts? -- Jack L. Forester, Jr. UNIX Systems Administrator, Stf Lockheed Martin Information Technology (304) 625-3946 ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] 9940B
We've got a bunch of 9940B drives and use 262144 for SIZE_DATA BUFFERS. Performance is very good. When we eval'd the drives a couple of years ago, I saw peak performance of 65MB/sec on really compressible data. Our numbers vary widely depending on the nature of the data being backed up. From the docs I read, I believe the drive maxes out at 70MB/sec. If you can feed the drives compressible data in a constant stream, 50MB/sec is not unreasonable. I like the performance stats on the new T1 drives, but I'm very disappointed that they didn't build in read compatibility with the T9940 drives. The carts are completely incompatible. If we're going to have to do a data migration if we get new drives, might as well look at LTO, too. David Rock wrote: >* Clooney, David <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-10-14 15:19]: > > >>Keep your hair on Bob >> >>Ok so tyou know about drives, point taken. >> >>I think you misinterpretted my mail. >> >>I was merely trying to find out the maximum I/O the drive supports , >>phew. >> >> > >We have seen real world testing at 55MB/sec and I believe the rated >speed is around 65MB/sec > > > -- Jack L. Forester, Jr. UNIX Systems Administrator, Stf Lockheed Martin Information Technology (304) 625-3946 ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Clustered Master servers
Bobby, I'm running clustered master servers just as you describe, and according to our Symantec rep, you do not need SSO licenses for your clustered master servers. However, if those same drives are shared with other media servers, then the answer becomes "yes, you do need SSO licenses". Clustered NBU is not supported in an active/active config, so the drives are used on only one of the nodes in the cluster at any one time, so the drives really aren't being "shared" between the cluster nodes. This also means that you do not need separate NBU licenses for each node, since the license "floats" to whichever node has the nbu_server service group. I just confirmed this last week with our rep as we had someone here who wanted to set up a high availability media server. The Veritas Cluster Server (Storage Foundation HA) agents you need for NetBackup are included with NetBackup. Look at the HA Guide for details. The files are in /usr/openv/netbackup/bin/cluster Bobby Williams wrote: >Masters are Solaris 9, NB5.1MP4 > >If master servers are clustered with Veritas cluster, how does NetBackup deal >with shared tape drives that both masters connect to? > >Do we have to get SSO licenses so they can share the drives? > >Is there a cluster aware add on that I will have to get? > >Please don't give your opinion, I am seeking info from folks that are using >clustered Sun masters. (not meaning to be rude, but to many erroneous opions >can be harmful.) > >Thanks. > >Bobby > >___ >Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu >http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu > > -- Jack L. Forester, Jr. UNIX Systems Administrator, Stf Lockheed Martin Information Technology (304) 625-3946 ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] 5.1MP5...Praises? Curses?
I'm trying to decide whether to go with MP5, but after reading about one person's possible catalog corruption after installing it, I'm a little leery. Has anyone else experienced any problems after Installing MP5, or is this catalog corruption thing likely an isolated incident? I know to do all the usual things like having a good catalog backup before installing the MP, but I'd like to avoid backing it out and recovering the catalog if at all possible. -- Jack L. Forester, Jr. UNIX Systems Administrator, Stf Lockheed Martin Information Technology (304) 625-3946 ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] SSO Options
*SIGH* We've got some Symantec folks coming on-site next week, so I'll have to get another statement from them about the licensing. It's such a moving target. Greenberg, Katherine A wrote: >Unless things have changed since December... SSO licenses are per >server. There is, however, a per drive SHARED DRIVE license. > > > >-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jack >Forester, Jr. >Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 12:16 PM >To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu >Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] SSO Options > > >Something else to bear in mind: Unless things have changed recently, >and I have an email from Veritas to support this, SSO licenses are >licensed per drive. If you have 5 drives that you are sharing, you need > >5 SSO licenses. > >If this is not, in fact, the case, I'll need to find new Veritas reps. >I dearly wish that they'd simplify their licensing! > >Justin King wrote: > > > >>1. I'm not familiar with the specific devices, but you should probably >>be okay with a single dedicated 'backup' HBA. >> >>2. You'll need a SAN Media Server license and SSO license for each >>media server you want you backup over the SAN >> >>3. (see above) >> >>4. I have 5-6 Linux SAN Media servers (RH73, CentOS3 & CentOS4) - they >>work great. >> >> >> >> >> >>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin, >> >> > > > >>Jonathan (Contractor) >>Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 7:49 AM >>To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu >>Subject: [Veritas-bu] SSO Options >> >> >> >>All, >> >> >> >>We're running 5.1 MP4 on Windows and UNIX (Solaris 2.8) here, and with >>all the budget money flying around I'm looking into adding the SSO >>Option. Basically, I would like to add our ATL to the SAN Switch and >>have our larger capacity file and database servers then SSO themselves >>a free drive and write directly to it. >> >> >> >>Essentially replacing >> >> >> >>SAN (DATA) --> Client --> 1GB Nic --> Media Server --> (SCSI) >>ATL/DRIVE# >> >> >> >>with >> >> >> >>SAN (DATA) --> Client --> SAN --> ATL/DRIVE# >> >> >> >>I have a few questions. >> >> >> >>#1 - Does running both the Storage Device (Hitachi AMS 500) and SSOing >>a drive on in the ATL affect performance? I'm assuming I can easily >>drive our SDLT220 drives to capacity using this method, but should I >>use two HBAs? (I'm assuming no.) >> >> >> >>#2 - Does every server that wants to "grab" a drive need a media server >> >> > > > >>license? I would only be using these servers daily to run their own >>backups - not others. Is this that SSO Media Server license I hear >>mentioned every once and a while? >> >> >> >>#3 - What's involved in upgrading my regular old Master / Media servers >> >> > > > >>to SSO (from a software perspective?) Do I have to upgrade everything >>to SSO, or simply add a few new SSO Media servers to my current setup? >> >> >> >>#4 - Does anyone run SSO on Redhat Linux AS 3? Several of our larger >>databases are now Oracle on Linux. >> >> >> >>Thanks all! >> >> >> >>-Jonathan >> >> >> >> >>--- >>- >> >>___ >>Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu >>http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu >> >> >> >> > > > > -- Jack L. Forester, Jr. UNIX Systems Administrator, Stf Lockheed Martin Information Technology (304) 625-3946 ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] SSO Options
Something else to bear in mind: Unless things have changed recently, and I have an email from Veritas to support this, SSO licenses are licensed per drive. If you have 5 drives that you are sharing, you need 5 SSO licenses. If this is not, in fact, the case, I'll need to find new Veritas reps. I dearly wish that they'd simplify their licensing! Justin King wrote: >1. I'm not familiar with the specific devices, but you should probably >be okay with a single dedicated 'backup' HBA. > >2. You'll need a SAN Media Server license and SSO license for each media >server you want you backup over the SAN > >3. (see above) > >4. I have 5-6 Linux SAN Media servers (RH73, CentOS3 & CentOS4) - they >work great. > > > > > >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin, >Jonathan (Contractor) >Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 7:49 AM >To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu >Subject: [Veritas-bu] SSO Options > > > >All, > > > >We're running 5.1 MP4 on Windows and UNIX (Solaris 2.8) here, and with >all the budget money flying around I'm looking into adding the SSO >Option. Basically, I would like to add our ATL to the SAN Switch and >have our larger capacity file and database servers then SSO themselves a >free drive and write directly to it. > > > >Essentially replacing > > > >SAN (DATA) --> Client --> 1GB Nic --> Media Server --> (SCSI) ATL/DRIVE# > > > >with > > > >SAN (DATA) --> Client --> SAN --> ATL/DRIVE# > > > >I have a few questions. > > > >#1 - Does running both the Storage Device (Hitachi AMS 500) and SSOing a >drive on in the ATL affect performance? I'm assuming I can easily drive >our SDLT220 drives to capacity using this method, but should I use two >HBAs? (I'm assuming no.) > > > >#2 - Does every server that wants to "grab" a drive need a media server >license? I would only be using these servers daily to run their own >backups - not others. Is this that SSO Media Server license I hear >mentioned every once and a while? > > > >#3 - What's involved in upgrading my regular old Master / Media servers >to SSO (from a software perspective?) Do I have to upgrade everything >to SSO, or simply add a few new SSO Media servers to my current setup? > > > >#4 - Does anyone run SSO on Redhat Linux AS 3? Several of our larger >databases are now Oracle on Linux. > > > >Thanks all! > > > >-Jonathan > > > > > > >___ >Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu >http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu > > -- Jack L. Forester, Jr. UNIX Systems Administrator, Stf Lockheed Martin Information Technology (304) 625-3946 ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] remove devices from dead media server
I've used (from memory) something like vmglob -delete -devhost This removed everything from the global device database for that media server...robotic defs as well as drives. Paul Keating wrote: >Yeah, that's what I'd been trying to do, but after trying to delete the >device it would not delete, as it could not confirm the deletion with >the media server"MM Status 77" or similar...can't remember right >now. > >I got rid of them using vmglob. >vmglob -delete -drive -drvtype TLD -name IBMULTRIUM-TD20 -devhost >test-media >vmglob -delete -drive -drvtype TLD -name IBMULTRIUM-TD21 -devhost >test-media >vmglob -delete -robot -serial ADIC_1_9Y0624514 -robnum 0 -devhost >test-media > >Paul > > > > > > > >La version française suit le texte anglais. > > > >This email may contain privileged and/or confidential information, and the >Bank of >Canada does not waive any related rights. Any distribution, use, or copying of >this >email or the information it contains by other than the intended recipient is >unauthorized. If you received this email in error please delete it immediately >from >your system and notify the sender promptly by email that you have done so. > > > >Le présent courriel peut contenir de l'information privilégiée ou >confidentielle. >La Banque du Canada ne renonce pas aux droits qui s'y rapportent. Toute >diffusion, >utilisation ou copie de ce courriel ou des renseignements qu'il contient par >une >personne autre que le ou les destinataires désignés est interdite Si vous >recevez >ce courriel par erreur, veuillez le supprimer immédiatement et envoyer sans >délai à >l'expéditeur un message électronique pour l'aviser que vous avez éliminé de >votre >ordinateur toute copie du courriel reçu. > > > > >___ >Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu >http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu > > -- Jack L. Forester, Jr. UNIX Systems Administrator, Stf Lockheed Martin Information Technology (304) 625-3946 ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Upgrade to 6.0
DB corruption with 5.1 MP5? I must be living in a shell as I hadn't heard about that. We're getting ready to install MP5 in a couple of weeks. Can you elaborate? Dmitri Smirnov wrote: Still working on this one ... Overall impression - not worth it - too many changes, too many bugs, documentation and support site are useless. But between 5.1 MP3/4 data corruption and MP5 with DB corruption Symantec leaves not much choice. Few questions: - nbpem is dying every 2-5 mins with segmentation fault (Linux 2.4). I may be wrong but it can be related to attempts to forward email using clients... should be fixed in MP3 - is anyone had same problem or have a fix? - few libraries transferred w/o problem to EMM, one finished with all tapes in Netbackup pool... Is anyway to assign tapes correctly to right pools and recover the rest of mediaDB information? - Jobs are going bananas... Bytes are growing on jobs in 'Queued' state, they go to 'Completed' state after backup is finished and restart after that once again...How to fix that one? - Firewalling changed big time.. Hope I'll fix that based on Symantec documentation. - Is only 'root' allowed to use Java admin interface remotely w/o NBAC? Dmitri ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu -- Jack L. Forester, Jr. UNIX Systems Administrator, Stf Lockheed Martin Information Technology (304) 625-3946 ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] can SAN media server restore clients?
An SSO license allows multiple media servers to share drives, like in a SAN environment. To have a media server backup clients other than itself, you need a full media server license. Jeff Lightner wrote: As I understand it the SAN Media Server license is only to allow a server on the SAN to backup and restore itself. An SSO license allows a media server to backup and restore other servers. We use SSO for the purpose you indicate here with no problems. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bob Stump Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2006 2:29 PM To: Marianne Berg; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] can SAN media server restore clients? NetBackup 5.1_MP5 fixes include: Etrack Incident = ET522055 Description: Restore to an alternate client (not a master or media server) by a SAN media server failed with an error status 159: The licensed features for this system did not permit the backup of a remote client (). To avoid this issue, make sure that the license key is entered properly. SAN media server licensing should be enforced for backup but not for restore to allow maximum flexibility for device recovery and data restoration. "Marianne van den Berg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 4/28/2006 3:55 PM >>> Hi Bob I don't think there's a way of knowing for sure without trying! PLEASE try and let the list know - my gut-feel says it should work as long as all the necessary SERVER entries are in place. Just make sure you have all the necessary logs in place before you start: bprd on the master, bpbrm on the media server, bpcd on the client. GOOD LUCK and please let us know! Marianne -Original Message- From: Bob Stump [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thu 2006/04/27 09:20 To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Cc: Subject: [Veritas-bu] can SAN media server restore clients? can a licensed SAN media server be used to restore data to a client other than itself? -- Jack L. Forester, Jr. UNIX Systems Administrator, Stf Lockheed Martin Information Technology (304) 625-3946 ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Hardware compression not working
Some drives can have the compression turned on by a drive setting so that it uses compression, regardless. Did any of your drive settings change? I agree with a previous poster in that you should do some kind of a test to determine how much data is being written to a tape before it moves on to a new tape. bob944 wrote: Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 10:42:58 -0400 From: "Carlisle, D Renee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I checked all that and it looks good=2E Sg=2Econf is identical, major numb= ers and minor number convention on the HP looks the same (they don't exist = on sun) no mention of compression or errors in bptm=2E Our issue is that = if we don't figure this out by Friday, we will be out of tapes=2E=0D=0A =0D= What makes you believe that hardware compression is not working? Testing how many copies of a repeatable data set go to a newly expired tape before a second tape gets used, and repeating that (same tape, same data, same client) with 1 1.5:1 or 2:1 difference would be a clear indication. Didn't you mention that you had changed to a new (partitioned) library and drives, and were getting what you suspect is no h/w compression on one side of the library? I'd want to know the library's contribution to your issue by testing. AFAIK, hardware compression is solely controlled by a SCSI command which sets the mode; the bits for which you see in the multiple-mode fields in Solaris st.conf entries. That's a driver function. On Solaris, you can look in messages on startup and see if the capability bits and modes you expect are what are reported. I'd suggest proving the compression assertion first, then getting support people for the drive/library/drivers involved. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu -- Jack L. Forester, Jr. UNIX Systems Administrator, Stf Lockheed Martin Information Technology (304) 625-3946 ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Issues with NetBackup after applying Solaris patches
We do patches on our Solaris master servers on a semi-annual basis. We also take advantage of the fact that both our test and production environments are clustered to minimize the chances that a bad patch will hose the environment. We use a rolling upgrade method. First, we apply patches to the standby node in the cluster and reboot. If, after a week, we have no problems with the patches, we failover our NetBackup and ACSLS services to the newly patched server and allow it to run there for a week. If there are problems, we move the services back to the unpatched node. If we have no problems, only then will we put the patches on the other node in the cluster. Although we've not yet had any problems with any patches, I feel pretty confident that we would not be put out of business if a Solaris patch happened to break something critical (unless it were something that didn't show up until after both nodes in the cluster had been patched). Jeff Lightner wrote: Support organizations not coming up with obvious solutions is something I'm fairly used to. In fact I've had occasions where I theorized as to the correct answer but was told by support that wasn't it only to later try it in desperation and find that it was indeed the fix. Perhaps Katherine's experience with support organizations has been better than mine. Is there one that doesn't always first suggest upgrading to their latest patch/release to fix whatever issue rather than doing basic troubleshooting? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Rock Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2006 11:19 AM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Issues with NetBackup after applying Solaris patches * Greenberg, Katherine A <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-04-06 10:21]: Don't think that is it, but who knows. I would hope that w/ Sun and Veritas both heavily on the case someone would've come up with that by now ;) LOL!!! Stop it, you're killing me. -- Jack L. Forester, Jr. UNIX Systems Administrator, Stf Lockheed Martin Information Technology (304) 625-3946 ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
