R: NTBackup failing on large files

[HELP_PC]

Yes, I referred to what you report but his card looks as the integrated one
 
GuidoElia
HELPPC
 

  _  

Da: Joseph L. Casale [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Inviato: giovedì 26 giugno 2008 7.08
A: NT System Admin Issues
Oggetto: RE: NTBackup failing on large files



Huh? Does internal == integrated or something?
My LSI Logic PCI-X Ultra320 HBA is very much a "separate" card, or as he 
states, PCI-X J I have the same setup, and that card is likely the one HP sells 
just for tape drives.
jlc

 

From: HELP_PC [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 9:55 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: R: NTBackup failing on large files

 

That is not a separate card but internal. Try with a HP specific adaptor. They 
have a very good one at 320

 

GuidoElia

HELPPC

 

 

  _  

Da: David W. McSpadden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Inviato: mercoledì 25 giugno 2008 18.02
A: NT System Admin Issues
Oggetto: Re: NTBackup failing on large files

The HP Ultrium 1-SCSI SCSI Sequential Device [Tape drive] is connected to the 
LSI Logic PCI-X Ultra320 SCSI Host Adapter.

SQL runs on it's own volume D: (HP LOGICAL VOLUME SCSI Disk Device (73.37 GB) 
-- drive 2).

The Data files for the database are on volume J: (HP LOGICAL VOLUME SCSI Disk 
Device (513.62 GB) -- drive 0) or volume R: (HP LOGICAL VOLUME SCSI Disk Device 
(1027.47 GB) -- drive 5) and the log files for all the databases are on volume 
L: (HP LOGICAL VOLUME SCSI Disk Device (733.91 GB) -- drive 4).

SQL backups are stored on volume S: (HP LOGICAL VOLUME SCSI Disk Device (733.91 
GB) -- drive 6).

S:, L:, and R: are on one Storage Array 30.  S: has 6 SAS Drives at 10k RPM, L: 
has 6 SAS Drives at 10k RPM, R: has 8 SAS Drives at 10k RPM.  All are RAID 5.

J: in on it's own Storage Array 30. J: is RAID 1+0 with 20 SAS Drives at 15k 
RPM.

D: is on the same BUS as C: and both are mirrored 73Gb 15k RPM SAS Drives.

SQL reports no errors creating the backup and a restore of the backup file is 
completed daily to a report database to verify the .bak file on the S: is good.

Running NTBackup with the Tape Drive or the USB drive (W:) gets the same 
NTBackup errors: 

 

Backup Status
Operation: Backup
Active backup destination: LTO Ultrium
Media name: "Media created 6/24/2008 at 1:45 PM"

 

Volume shadow copy creation: Attempt 1.
Backup (via shadow copy) of "S: Backup Files"
Backup set #3 on media #1
Backup description: "Set created 6/24/2008 at 1:45 PM"
Media name: "Media created 6/24/2008 at 1:37 PM"

 

Backup Type: Normal

 

Backup started on 6/24/2008 at 1:45 PM.
WARNING: Portions of "\in01data\MonthendDump\in01databackup.BAK" cannot be 
read.  The backed up data is corrupt or incomplete.
This file will not restore correctly.
Backup completed on 6/24/2008 at 2:14 PM.
Directories: 3
Files: 1
Corrupt: 1
Bytes: 57,193,763,724
Time:  28 minutes and  53 seconds

 

--

I think it may have something to do with the volume shadow copy???

 

 

 

 


 

Operating System

 

System Model


Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition Service Pack 2 (build 3790)

 

HP ProLiant DL580 G5 
System Serial Number: USE804N0K7
Chassis Serial Number: USE804N0K7
Enclosure Type: Rack Mount Chassis


Processor a

 

Main Circuit Board b


2.40 gigahertz Intel Xeon (16 installed)
64 kilobyte primary memory cache
4096 kilobyte secondary memory cache

 

Bus Clock: 1066 megahertz
BIOS: HP P61 12/07/2007


Drives

 

Memory Modules c,d


3846.03 Gigabytes Usable Hard Drive Capacity
2786.31 Gigabytes Hard Drive Free Space

HL-DT-ST DVDRAM GSA-T20L [CD-ROM drive]
HP Ultrium 1-SCSI SCSI Sequential Device [Tape drive]

HP LOGICAL VOLUME SCSI Disk Device (1027.47 GB) -- drive 5
HP LOGICAL VOLUME SCSI Disk Device (733.91 GB) -- drive 4
HP LOGICAL VOLUME SCSI Disk Device (440.34 GB) -- drive 3
HP LOGICAL VOLUME SCSI Disk Device (73.37 GB) -- drive 1
HP LOGICAL VOLUME SCSI Disk Device (513.62 GB) -- drive 0
HP LOGICAL VOLUME SCSI Disk Device (733.91 GB) -- drive 6
HP LOGICAL VOLUME SCSI Disk Device (73.37 GB) -- drive 2
WD 2500BEV External USB Device [Hard drive] (250.06 GB) -- drive 7

 

65534 Megabytes Installed Memory

Slot 'DIMM 1A ' has 2048 MB
Slot 'DIMM 2C ' has 2048 MB
Slot 'DIMM 3E ' has 2048 MB
Slot 'DIMM 4G ' has 2048 MB
Slot 'Board 1, DIMM 1A' has 2048 MB
Slot 'Board 1, DIMM 2B' has 2048 MB
Slot 'Board 1, DIMM 3C' has 2048 MB
Slot 'Board 1, DIMM 4D' has 2048 MB
Slot 'DIMM 5A ' has 2048 MB
Slot 'DIMM 6C ' has 2048 MB
Slot 'DIMM 7E ' has 2048 MB
Slot 'DIMM 8G ' has 2048 MB
Slot 'Board 2, DIMM 1A' has 2048 MB
Slot 'Board 2, DIMM 2B' has 2048 MB
Slot 'Board 2, DIMM 3C' has 2048 MB
Slot 'Board 2, DIMM 4D' has 2048 MB
Slot 'DIMM 9B ' has 2048 MB
Slot 'DIMM 10D ' has 2048 MB
Slot 'DIMM 11F ' has 2048 MB
Slot 'DIMM 12H ' has 2048 MB
Slot 'Board 3, DIMM 1A' has 2048 MB
Slot 'Board 3, DIMM 2B' has 2048 MB
Slot 'Board 3, DIMM 3C' has 2048 MB
Slot 'Board 3, DIMM 4D' has 2048 MB
Slot 'DIMM 13B ' has 2048 MB
Slot 'DIMM 14D ' has 2048 MB
Slot 'DIMM 15F ' has 2048 M

RE: NTBackup failing on large files

[Joseph L. Casale]

Huh? Does internal == integrated or something?
My LSI Logic PCI-X Ultra320 HBA is very much a "separate" card, or as he 
states, PCI-X :) I have the same setup, and that card is likely the one HP 
sells just for tape drives.
jlc

From: HELP_PC [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 9:55 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: R: NTBackup failing on large files

That is not a separate card but internal. Try with a HP specific adaptor. They 
have a very good one at 320

GuidoElia
HELPPC



Da: David W. McSpadden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Inviato: mercoledì 25 giugno 2008 18.02
A: NT System Admin Issues
Oggetto: Re: NTBackup failing on large files
The HP Ultrium 1-SCSI SCSI Sequential Device [Tape drive] is connected to the 
LSI Logic PCI-X Ultra320 SCSI Host Adapter.
SQL runs on it's own volume D: (HP LOGICAL VOLUME SCSI Disk Device (73.37 GB) 
-- drive 2).
The Data files for the database are on volume J: (HP LOGICAL VOLUME SCSI Disk 
Device (513.62 GB) -- drive 0) or volume R: (HP LOGICAL VOLUME SCSI Disk Device 
(1027.47 GB) -- drive 5) and the log files for all the databases are on volume 
L: (HP LOGICAL VOLUME SCSI Disk Device (733.91 GB) -- drive 4).
SQL backups are stored on volume S: (HP LOGICAL VOLUME SCSI Disk Device (733.91 
GB) -- drive 6).
S:, L:, and R: are on one Storage Array 30.  S: has 6 SAS Drives at 10k RPM, L: 
has 6 SAS Drives at 10k RPM, R: has 8 SAS Drives at 10k RPM.  All are RAID 5.
J: in on it's own Storage Array 30. J: is RAID 1+0 with 20 SAS Drives at 15k 
RPM.
D: is on the same BUS as C: and both are mirrored 73Gb 15k RPM SAS Drives.
SQL reports no errors creating the backup and a restore of the backup file is 
completed daily to a report database to verify the .bak file on the S: is good.
Running NTBackup with the Tape Drive or the USB drive (W:) gets the same 
NTBackup errors:

Backup Status
Operation: Backup
Active backup destination: LTO Ultrium
Media name: "Media created 6/24/2008 at 1:45 PM"

Volume shadow copy creation: Attempt 1.
Backup (via shadow copy) of "S: Backup Files"
Backup set #3 on media #1
Backup description: "Set created 6/24/2008 at 1:45 PM"
Media name: "Media created 6/24/2008 at 1:37 PM"

Backup Type: Normal

Backup started on 6/24/2008 at 1:45 PM.
WARNING: Portions of "\in01data\MonthendDump\in01databackup.BAK" cannot be 
read.  The backed up data is corrupt or incomplete.
This file will not restore correctly.
Backup completed on 6/24/2008 at 2:14 PM.
Directories: 3
Files: 1
Corrupt: 1
Bytes: 57,193,763,724
Time:  28 minutes and  53 seconds

--
I think it may have something to do with the volume shadow copy???





Operating System



System Model

Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition Service Pack 2 (build 3790)



HP ProLiant DL580 G5
System Serial Number: USE804N0K7
Chassis Serial Number: USE804N0K7
Enclosure Type: Rack Mount Chassis

Processor a



Main Circuit Board b

2.40 gigahertz Intel Xeon (16 installed)
64 kilobyte primary memory cache
4096 kilobyte secondary memory cache



Bus Clock: 1066 megahertz
BIOS: HP P61 12/07/2007

Drives



Memory Modules c,d

3846.03 Gigabytes Usable Hard Drive Capacity
2786.31 Gigabytes Hard Drive Free Space

HL-DT-ST DVDRAM GSA-T20L [CD-ROM drive]
HP Ultrium 1-SCSI SCSI Sequential Device [Tape drive]

HP LOGICAL VOLUME SCSI Disk Device (1027.47 GB) -- drive 5
HP LOGICAL VOLUME SCSI Disk Device (733.91 GB) -- drive 4
HP LOGICAL VOLUME SCSI Disk Device (440.34 GB) -- drive 3
HP LOGICAL VOLUME SCSI Disk Device (73.37 GB) -- drive 1
HP LOGICAL VOLUME SCSI Disk Device (513.62 GB) -- drive 0
HP LOGICAL VOLUME SCSI Disk Device (733.91 GB) -- drive 6
HP LOGICAL VOLUME SCSI Disk Device (73.37 GB) -- drive 2
WD 2500BEV External USB Device [Hard drive] (250.06 GB) -- drive 7



65534 Megabytes Installed Memory

Slot 'DIMM 1A ' has 2048 MB
Slot 'DIMM 2C ' has 2048 MB
Slot 'DIMM 3E ' has 2048 MB
Slot 'DIMM 4G ' has 2048 MB
Slot 'Board 1, DIMM 1A' has 2048 MB
Slot 'Board 1, DIMM 2B' has 2048 MB
Slot 'Board 1, DIMM 3C' has 2048 MB
Slot 'Board 1, DIMM 4D' has 2048 MB
Slot 'DIMM 5A ' has 2048 MB
Slot 'DIMM 6C ' has 2048 MB
Slot 'DIMM 7E ' has 2048 MB
Slot 'DIMM 8G ' has 2048 MB
Slot 'Board 2, DIMM 1A' has 2048 MB
Slot 'Board 2, DIMM 2B' has 2048 MB
Slot 'Board 2, DIMM 3C' has 2048 MB
Slot 'Board 2, DIMM 4D' has 2048 MB
Slot 'DIMM 9B ' has 2048 MB
Slot 'DIMM 10D ' has 2048 MB
Slot 'DIMM 11F ' has 2048 MB
Slot 'DIMM 12H ' has 2048 MB
Slot 'Board 3, DIMM 1A' has 2048 MB
Slot 'Board 3, DIMM 2B' has 2048 MB
Slot 'Board 3, DIMM 3C' has 2048 MB
Slot 'Board 3, DIMM 4D' has 2048 MB
Slot 'DIMM 13B ' has 2048 MB
Slot 'DIMM 14D ' has 2048 MB
Slot 'DIMM 15F ' has 2048 MB
Slot 'DIMM 16H ' has 2048 MB
Slot 'Board 4, DIMM 1A' has 2048 MB
Slot 'Board 4, DIMM 2B' has 2048 MB
Slot 'Board 4, DIMM 3C' has 2048 MB
Slot 'Board 4, DIMM 4D' has 2048 MB



Local Drive Volumes




c: (NTFS on drive 1)

73.36 GB

52.03 GB free

d: (NTFS on drive 2)

73.37 GB

39.55 GB free

e: (NTFS on driv

R: NTBackup failing on large files

[HELP_PC]

That is not a separate card but internal. Try with a HP specific adaptor. They 
have a very good one at 320
 
GuidoElia
HELPPC
 

  _  

Da: David W. McSpadden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Inviato: mercoledì 25 giugno 2008 18.02
A: NT System Admin Issues
Oggetto: Re: NTBackup failing on large files


The HP Ultrium 1-SCSI SCSI Sequential Device [Tape drive] is connected to the 
LSI Logic PCI-X Ultra320 SCSI Host Adapter.
SQL runs on it's own volume D: (HP LOGICAL VOLUME SCSI Disk Device (73.37 GB) 
-- drive 2).
The Data files for the database are on volume J: (HP LOGICAL VOLUME SCSI Disk 
Device (513.62 GB) -- drive 0) or volume R: (HP LOGICAL VOLUME SCSI Disk Device 
(1027.47 GB) -- drive 5) and the log files for all the databases are on volume 
L: (HP LOGICAL VOLUME SCSI Disk Device (733.91 GB) -- drive 4).
SQL backups are stored on volume S: (HP LOGICAL VOLUME SCSI Disk Device (733.91 
GB) -- drive 6).
S:, L:, and R: are on one Storage Array 30.  S: has 6 SAS Drives at 10k RPM, L: 
has 6 SAS Drives at 10k RPM, R: has 8 SAS Drives at 10k RPM.  All are RAID 5.
J: in on it's own Storage Array 30. J: is RAID 1+0 with 20 SAS Drives at 15k 
RPM.
D: is on the same BUS as C: and both are mirrored 73Gb 15k RPM SAS Drives.
SQL reports no errors creating the backup and a restore of the backup file is 
completed daily to a report database to verify the .bak file on the S: is good.
Running NTBackup with the Tape Drive or the USB drive (W:) gets the same 
NTBackup errors: 
 
Backup Status
Operation: Backup
Active backup destination: LTO Ultrium
Media name: "Media created 6/24/2008 at 1:45 PM"
 
Volume shadow copy creation: Attempt 1.
Backup (via shadow copy) of "S: Backup Files"
Backup set #3 on media #1
Backup description: "Set created 6/24/2008 at 1:45 PM"
Media name: "Media created 6/24/2008 at 1:37 PM"
 
Backup Type: Normal
 
Backup started on 6/24/2008 at 1:45 PM.
WARNING: Portions of "\in01data\MonthendDump\in01databackup.BAK" cannot be 
read.  The backed up data is corrupt or incomplete.
This file will not restore correctly.
Backup completed on 6/24/2008 at 2:14 PM.
Directories: 3
Files: 1
Corrupt: 1
Bytes: 57,193,763,724
Time:  28 minutes and  53 seconds
 
--
I think it may have something to do with the volume shadow copy???

 
 
 
 

 
Operating System
 System Model   
Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition Service Pack 2 (build 3790)  
 HP ProLiant DL580 G5 
System Serial Number: USE804N0K7
Chassis Serial Number: USE804N0K7
Enclosure Type: Rack Mount Chassis  
Processor a  Main Circuit Board b   
2.40 gigahertz Intel Xeon (16 installed)
64 kilobyte primary memory cache
4096 kilobyte secondary memory cache Bus Clock: 1066 megahertz
BIOS: HP P61 12/07/2007 
Drives   Memory Modules c,d 
3846.03 Gigabytes Usable Hard Drive Capacity
2786.31 Gigabytes Hard Drive Free Space

HL-DT-ST DVDRAM GSA-T20L [CD-ROM drive]
HP Ultrium 1-SCSI SCSI Sequential Device [Tape drive]

HP LOGICAL VOLUME SCSI Disk Device (1027.47 GB) -- drive 5
HP LOGICAL VOLUME SCSI Disk Device (733.91 GB) -- drive 4
HP LOGICAL VOLUME SCSI Disk Device (440.34 GB) -- drive 3
HP LOGICAL VOLUME SCSI Disk Device (73.37 GB) -- drive 1
HP LOGICAL VOLUME SCSI Disk Device (513.62 GB) -- drive 0
HP LOGICAL VOLUME SCSI Disk Device (733.91 GB) -- drive 6
HP LOGICAL VOLUME SCSI Disk Device (73.37 GB) -- drive 2
WD 2500BEV External USB Device [Hard drive] (250.06 GB) -- drive 7  
 65534 Megabytes Installed Memory

Slot 'DIMM 1A ' has 2048 MB
Slot 'DIMM 2C ' has 2048 MB
Slot 'DIMM 3E ' has 2048 MB
Slot 'DIMM 4G ' has 2048 MB
Slot 'Board 1, DIMM 1A' has 2048 MB
Slot 'Board 1, DIMM 2B' has 2048 MB
Slot 'Board 1, DIMM 3C' has 2048 MB
Slot 'Board 1, DIMM 4D' has 2048 MB
Slot 'DIMM 5A ' has 2048 MB
Slot 'DIMM 6C ' has 2048 MB
Slot 'DIMM 7E ' has 2048 MB
Slot 'DIMM 8G ' has 2048 MB
Slot 'Board 2, DIMM 1A' has 2048 MB
Slot 'Board 2, DIMM 2B' has 2048 MB
Slot 'Board 2, DIMM 3C' has 2048 MB
Slot 'Board 2, DIMM 4D' has 2048 MB
Slot 'DIMM 9B ' has 2048 MB
Slot 'DIMM 10D ' has 2048 MB
Slot 'DIMM 11F ' has 2048 MB
Slot 'DIMM 12H ' has 2048 MB
Slot 'Board 3, DIMM 1A' has 2048 MB
Slot 'Board 3, DIMM 2B' has 2048 MB
Slot 'Board 3, DIMM 3C' has 2048 MB
Slot 'Board 3, DIMM 4D' has 2048 MB
Slot 'DIMM 13B ' has 2048 MB
Slot 'DIMM 14D ' has 2048 MB
Slot 'DIMM 15F ' has 2048 MB
Slot 'DIMM 16H ' has 2048 MB
Slot 'Board 4, DIMM 1A' has 2048 MB
Slot 'Board 4, DIMM 2B' has 2048 MB
Slot 'Board 4, DIMM 3C' has 2048 MB
Slot 'Board 4, DIMM 4D' has 2048 MB 
 Local Drive Volumes
 

c: (NTFS on drive 1) 73.36 GB52.03 GB free  
d: (NTFS on drive 2) 73.37 GB39.55 GB free  
e: (NTFS on drive 3) 440.34 GB   289.08 GB free 
j: (NTFS on drive 0) 513.62 GB   438.36 GB free 
l: (NTFS on drive 4) 733.91 GB   611.72 GB free 
p: ( on drive e:)440.34 GB   289.08 GB free 
q: ( on drive e:)440.34 GB   

RE: Can't Safely Unplug USB drive

[Stefan Jafs]

Did set up the "ReadyBoost" by any chance, if so you can't remove the
USB key until you disable it.

 

__
Stefan Jafs 

 

From: Mike Gill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: June-25-08 20:47
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Can't Safely Unplug USB drive

 

Yeah I tried this too. The drive letter my thumb drive is on doesn't
show up in the list here either.

 

-- 
Mike Gill

 

From: Ken Schaefer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2008 7:35 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Can't Safely Unplug USB drive

 

Try handle.exe

 

Cheers

Ken

 

From: Mike Gill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Friday, 13 June 2008 12:09 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Can't Safely Unplug USB drive

 

Is there an app that will show me programs or processes that are
accessing a drive letter? This is one of my biggest frustrations with
Vista. Before it was almost impossible for me to be able to eject a USB
hard drive, now it is impossible any time. But now, I can't even "safely
remove" my thumb drive. I've exited out of all programs, down to the AV
and sidebar and even stopped the index service. Nothing suspicious is
seen in the task manager. I'm just at a loss. I've tried process monitor
and can't get it to show me anything.

 

-- 
Mike Gill

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



This email and any attached files are confidential and intended solely for the 
intended recipient(s). If you are not the named recipient you should not read, 
distribute, copy or alter this email. Any views or opinions expressed in this 
email are those of the author and do not represent those of the Amico 
Corpoartion company. Warning: Although precautions have been taken to make sure 
no viruses are present in this email, the company cannot accept responsibility 
for any loss or damage that arise from the use of this email or attachments.
~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: Can't Safely Unplug USB drive

[Mike Gill]

Yeah I tried this too. The drive letter my thumb drive is on doesn't show up
in the list here either.

 

-- 
Mike Gill

 

From: Ken Schaefer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2008 7:35 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Can't Safely Unplug USB drive

 

Try handle.exe

 

Cheers

Ken

 

From: Mike Gill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Friday, 13 June 2008 12:09 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Can't Safely Unplug USB drive

 

Is there an app that will show me programs or processes that are accessing a
drive letter? This is one of my biggest frustrations with Vista. Before it
was almost impossible for me to be able to eject a USB hard drive, now it is
impossible any time. But now, I can't even "safely  remove" my thumb drive.
I've exited out of all programs, down to the AV and sidebar and even stopped
the index service. Nothing suspicious is seen in the task manager. I'm just
at a loss. I've tried process monitor and can't get it to show me anything.

 

-- 
Mike Gill

 

 

 

 

 

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: Can't Safely Unplug USB drive

[Mike Gill]

Er, late reply. Yeah I tried this. The drive letter my thumb drive is on
doesn't show up in the list.

 

-- 
Mike Gill

 

From: Kirk Woloshyn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2008 7:33 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Can't Safely Unplug USB drive

 

process explorer

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/bb896653.aspx





Kirk Woloshyn
2825 Temple Avenue
Signal Hill, CA 90755
 
v 562.304.1939
c 562.682.0261



Mike Gill wrote: 

Is there an app that will show me programs or processes that are accessing a
drive letter? This is one of my biggest frustrations with Vista. Before it
was almost impossible for me to be able to eject a USB hard drive, now it is
impossible any time. But now, I can't even "safely  remove" my thumb drive.
I've exited out of all programs, down to the AV and sidebar and even stopped
the index service. Nothing suspicious is seen in the task manager. I'm just
at a loss. I've tried process monitor and can't get it to show me anything.

 

-- 
Mike Gill

 

 

 

 

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: NTBackup failing on large files

[Joseph L. Casale]

Not sure what ntbackup does if the vss switch is set to be used when its 
disabled.
If its not set, and it fails then you have some weird business going on :)
jlc

From: David W. McSpadden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 1:56 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: NTBackup failing on large files

Didn't help.
When I stopped VSS backup wouldn't even run.
When I went to the S: drive and reviewed the Shadow tab is was already disabled.
I enabled and disabled it again and the backup still failed.



- Original Message -
From: Joseph L. Casale
To: NT System Admin Issues
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 2:09 PM
Subject: RE: NTBackup failing on large files

Right click the drive, choose properties, but I would disable the service for 
your test to safely rule it out, as another drives issues cause the *whole* 
system to misbehave.
jlc

From: David W. McSpadden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 11:26 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: NTBackup failing on large files

The obvious is that no it isn't in use and not written to half way through.
Windows Batch file runs the process.  The Call to SQL backup has to finish and 
wait 10 minute before the Windows backup can ever run.
Now the not so obvious.  How does this brain dead dumb admin check and disable 
the VSS?

- Original Message -
From: Joseph L. Casale
To: NT System Admin Issues
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 12:29 PM
Subject: RE: NTBackup failing on large files

So stating the obvious, the file isn't in use, or overwritten halfway through?
You said VSS, AKA the devil? If you have vss enabled on a volume with large 
files like that, or many files (or actually at all ) *with out* 
redirecting copies to a physically different spindle (set of) you will surely 
have issues, I did.

Disable VSS, and attempt a dump to tape, let me know how it works...

jlc

From: David W. McSpadden [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 10:04 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: NTBackup failing on large files
Last firmware updates were done in February.  Everything was up to date then.
I am thinking it might be a VSS issue or just NTBackup.exe.  I have seen 
several articles stating
the NTBackup is in need of a hotfix.  My past production servers had trouble 
with RSM not NTBackup.
I am thinking a call to MS is coming soon.
- Original Message -
From: HELP_PC
To: NT System Admin Issues
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 11:45 AM
Subject: R: NTBackup failing on large files

Just 2 other things :updated last firmware for the LTO and disks from HP 
FIRMWARE DISK (8.0)?

GuidoElia
HELPPC



Da: David W. McSpadden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Inviato: mercoledì 25 giugno 2008 16.09
A: NT System Admin Issues
Oggetto: Re: NTBackup failing on large files
Tried to a USB got the same.
LTO has own card and own bus on the motherboard.
- Original Message -
From: HELP_PC
To: NT System Admin Issues
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 10:04 AM
Subject: R: NTBackup failing on large files

Try a backup to other media (i.e. disk). Has the LTO a separate card ?

GuidoElia
HELPPC



Da: David W. McSpadden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Inviato: mercoledì 25 giugno 2008 15.54
A: NT System Admin Issues
Oggetto: Re: NTBackup failing on large files
Maintenance plan within SQL 2000 Enterprise.
- Original Message -
From: Webster
To: NT System Admin Issues
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 9:53 AM
Subject: RE: NTBackup failing on large files


From: David W. McSpadden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: NTBackup failing on large files

I am running Windows Server Enterprise 2003.
I am running SQL Enterprise 2003.
On a 32 bit install.
I run SQL backup everynight.
I have a 60GB backup file for my production database.
I run NTBackup and it backup up all the databases except the Production 
database.
It runs for about 2 hours backing it up and then fails within about 300 Mb of 
finishing stating the file is inconsistant.
Has anyone seen this?

When you say "I run SQL backup everynight", do you mean you use a SQL 
maintenance plan to run a backup or you backup the actual database with 
NTBackup?


Webster














__
























This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are property of Indiana Members 
Credit Union, are confidential, and are intended solely for the use of the 
individual or entity to whom this e-mail is addressed. If you are not one of 
the named recipient(s) or otherwise have reason to be

RE: procurve port monitor

[Benjamin Zachary - Lists]

What I have in that switch is the LAN of the fw, the WAN of the FW and the
Cisco port. I can enable port monitoring easy enough and I did it on the lan
side of the fw, the wan side, and the cisco port and neer shows anything but
my traffic making me think the port monitor isn't working, or ntop cant
capture the data. ill toss wireshark on just to see if im seeing the packets
and see. Ntop just uses the winpcap driver anyway so not sure what im
missing.

 

Im using Open Extra's pre compiled win32 binaries for ntop and have used it
several times in the past successfully (but always with a hub) between the
LAN and the LAN FW port

  _  

From: Joe Heaton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 6:28 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: procurve port monitor

 

Need to make sure you've set all the other ports to be monitored.
Otherwise, the monitoring port doesn't know what traffic you want.

 

Joe Heaton

 

 

  _  

From: Benjamin Zachary - Lists [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 2:03 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: procurve port monitor

Im trying to run ntop on a pc and using port monitoring on a procurve. Ntop
is running but it only shows me data that I generating from the uit itself. 

 

I used to have a hub that I would drop on the wan side and run it and that
worked but i don't have it available and figured I would be able to use the
port monitor features

 

maybe im not understanding the port monitor function?

 

Thanks

 

 

 

 

 
 
 

 

 

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: procurve port monitor

[Joe Heaton]

Need to make sure you've set all the other ports to be monitored.
Otherwise, the monitoring port doesn't know what traffic you want.
 
Joe Heaton
 



From: Benjamin Zachary - Lists [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 2:03 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: procurve port monitor



Im trying to run ntop on a pc and using port monitoring on a procurve.
Ntop is running but it only shows me data that I generating from the uit
itself. 

 

I used to have a hub that I would drop on the wan side and run it and
that worked but i don't have it available and figured I would be able to
use the port monitor features

 

maybe im not understanding the port monitor function?

 

Thanks

 

 

 






~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: procurve port monitor

[Phillip Partipilo]

On our Procurve, a 4000M, I do this via the telnet menus; Switch
Configuration > Network Monitoring Port.  Enable monitoring, then type in
the port your computer is connected to in "Monitoring Port", then select all
the ports that are connected to systems you are interested in monitoring.
 
 
Phillip Partipilo
Parametric Solutions Inc.
Jupiter, Florida
(561) 747-6107
 
 
 

  _  

From: Benjamin Zachary - Lists [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 5:03 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: procurve port monitor



Im trying to run ntop on a pc and using port monitoring on a procurve. Ntop
is running but it only shows me data that I generating from the uit itself. 

 

I used to have a hub that I would drop on the wan side and run it and that
worked but i don't have it available and figured I would be able to use the
port monitor features

 

maybe im not understanding the port monitor function?

 

Thanks

 

 

 












  _  




If this email is spam, report it here:


http://www.OnlyMyEmail.com/ReportSpam
 













~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Re: Server access

[Steve Ens]

I upgraded the NIC drivers and voila, all was well.

On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 2:37 PM, Kennedy, Jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

>  Sounds like Microsoft Windows Server 2003 Scalable Networking Pack has
> struck yet again.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Steve Ens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 25, 2008 3:31 PM
> *To:* NT System Admin Issues
> *Subject:* Re: Server access
>
>
>
> Found the problemunplugged one of the NIC's...instant access.  I might
> have to try to update the driversodd that it only stopped working after
> the updates, there were no new drivers installed.  Maybe a call to HP would
> be in order.
>
> On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 2:15 PM, Peter van Houten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> Windows XP SP3 on clients?  I am seeing this behaviour sporadically but
> haven't managed to pin it down to SP3.
>
> On the 25/06/2008 21:05, Steve Ens wrote the following:
>
>
>
> For some strange reason some users have lost access to our SQL 2005 server.
>  While some users can still use their applications and databases, others
> can't even view the shared folder through network neighbourhood.  I ran
> updates on the server (2003) last night, and today there are issues.  I've
> made sure there are no firewalls active on any of the clients or the server.
>  I've gone so far as to remove the Trend client on the server.  The server
> in question is using the HP NIC teaming.  I can ping the server and RDP to
> it, but my other tech can't.  Any good places to continue my search?
> Thanks
>
>
>
> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> ~   ~
>
>
>
>

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Re: procurve port monitor

[Kurt Buff]

On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 2:03 PM, Benjamin Zachary - Lists
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Im trying to run ntop on a pc and using port monitoring on a procurve. Ntop
> is running but it only shows me data that I generating from the uit itself.
>
> I used to have a hub that I would drop on the wan side and run it and that
> worked but i don't have it available and figured I would be able to use the
> port monitor features
>
> maybe im not understanding the port monitor function?

Here's the configuration for the switch that I've placed between my
firewall and my backbone switch, on subnet 192.168.8.0

 Startup configuration:

 ; J4813A Configuration Editor; Created on release #F.05.50

 hostname "Inside Firewall"
 snmp-server contact "IT"
 cdp run
 mirror-port 24
 ip default-gateway 192.168.8.1
 snmp-server community "zetpub" Unrestricted
 vlan 1
name "DEFAULT_VLAN"
untagged 1-26
ip address 192.168.8.3 255.255.255.0
monitor
exit
 interface 1-23
monitor
exit
 no aaa port-access authenticator active

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: VMWare / Virtualization

[Fogarty, Richard R Mr CTR USA USASOC]

Yes, we're planning on using DRS and Vmotion as well.  There are
opportunities for us to simply use one virtual server per one physical box,
but the DR portion built in provides us with a much better environment.

Thanks!

-Original Message-
From: Benjamin Zachary - Lists [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 2:29 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: VMWare / Virtualization

To add to that, a well configured vmware box can arguably perform better in
certain environments if you can take advantage of the vswitch capabilities.
While you have a front end app with a back end database you could put those
on the SAME vm and create virtual NICs that never touch the network
interface it just gets 'switched' over from one box to the next, your
throughput goes up significantly as well as your not using that same 1gb
port for the incoming connections *and* the outgoing backend connection.

I have ported over just about everything, including systems with hardware
devices, like serial port devices (vmware server though) although I wouldn't
do it as a rule of thumb. 

If you plan to take advantage of the Vmotion and DRS features of vmware, you
could theoretically simply put one vm on a physical box, and have it fail
over to another, so you gain the auto failover as well as you could in event
of failure of other systems use that machine with its stand alone vm as the
designated 'temporary' area for other vm's during a vmotion or drs period.

So while putting 5-10 servers on a physical box is GREAT, you could also
benefit on the devices that cant really share resources on a full time basis
but be used in a limited scenario. 






~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Re: BES on VM?

[Eric Woodford]

Bes will run on vm, seen it, supported it, 100 users on a dl360. Issue
happens when you add other apps to that vm. Bes can quickly consume
all the bandwidth on a virtual nic.




On 6/25/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 06/24/2008 05:56:20 PM:
>
>> Sorry if this is too simple, but we have a BES server in a Lotus Notes
>> shop...
>
> My symapthies. We run Notes here, with BES.
>
>> Can the BES be moved and work well on a VMWare virtual server?
>
> I'm told not. I hear the VM engineers won't even touch Domino. That was
> enough for us to drop our plans to do it.
>
> Having said that ... yes, it will physically work. When we were testing
> upgrading our BES server from v2 to v4, we tested it in a VMware
> environment. And it does work. If you're a small enough shop, it might
> work without issue.
>
>
> --
> Michael Leone
> Network Administrator, ISM
> Philadelphia Housing Authority
> 2500 Jackson St
> Philadelphia, PA 19145
> Tel:  215-684-4180
> Cell: 215-252-0143
> 
>
> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> ~   ~

-- 
Sent from Gmail for mobile | mobile.google.com

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: NOD32 v2 definition issue?

[Mike French]

Same here, 3217 pegged a bunch of word docs. 3218 - Scanned again and are OK. 
It HAD to happen today, we have FDIC auditors in.


From: Tim Evans [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 3:01 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: NOD32 v2 definition issue?

3218 fixed our issues here


...Tim

From: Durf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 12:48 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: NOD32 v2 definition issue?

Latest defs still popping false positives.  Anyone got anything on this? 

-- Durf
On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 12:57 PM, Jon Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Rescanned my local system and the file that popped up for me the first time did 
not pop up this time.  Definitions were updated to the 3218.  Now to go back 
and check the server.
 
Jon
On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 12:32 PM, Jon Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The server seeing all the errors is on 3217 though.
 
Jon
On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 12:32 PM, Jon Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I am on 3218 definitions at the moment I am hoping that it passed through to 
that one as well.
 
Jon
On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 12:23 PM, Andy Ognenoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
There is a problem with the 3217 definitions.  I saw a post about it on the
Wilder Security Forums.  Causing me a headache too...

 - Andy O.

From: Jon Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 11:09 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: NOD32 v2 definition issue?


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!    ~
~   ~






-- 
--
Give a man a fish, and he'll eat for a day. 
Give a fish a man, and he'll eat for weeks! 



~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

procurve port monitor

[Benjamin Zachary - Lists]

Im trying to run ntop on a pc and using port monitoring on a procurve. Ntop
is running but it only shows me data that I generating from the uit itself. 

 

I used to have a hub that I would drop on the wan side and run it and that
worked but i don't have it available and figured I would be able to use the
port monitor features

 

maybe im not understanding the port monitor function?

 

Thanks

 

 

 


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: NOD32 v2 definition issue?

[Christopher J. Bosak]

Haven't had issues since the 3218 release.

 

Christopher J. Bosak

Vector Company

c. 847.603.4673

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

 

"You need to install an RTFM Interface, due to an LBNC issue."

- B.O.F.H. (Merged 2 into 1) - Me

 

From: Tim Evans [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 15:01 hrs
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: NOD32 v2 definition issue?

 

3218 fixed our issues here

 

 

.Tim

 

From: Durf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 12:48 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: NOD32 v2 definition issue?

 

Latest defs still popping false positives.  Anyone got anything on this? 

-- Durf

On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 12:57 PM, Jon Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Rescanned my local system and the file that popped up for me the first time
did not pop up this time.  Definitions were updated to the 3218.  Now to go
back and check the server.

 

Jon

On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 12:32 PM, Jon Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

The server seeing all the errors is on 3217 though.

 

Jon

On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 12:32 PM, Jon Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

I am on 3218 definitions at the moment I am hoping that it passed through to
that one as well.

 

Jon

On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 12:23 PM, Andy Ognenoff
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

There is a problem with the 3217 definitions.  I saw a post about it on the
Wilder Security Forums.  Causing me a headache too.

 - Andy O.


From: Jon Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 11:09 AM

To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: NOD32 v2 definition issue?




~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

 

 

 




-- 
--
Give a man a fish, and he'll eat for a day. 
Give a fish a man, and he'll eat for weeks! 

 

 

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Re: Server access

[Steve Ens]

Hi Jim
Ok, now I need to know, am I missing something here?

On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 2:37 PM, Kennedy, Jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

>  Sounds like Microsoft Windows Server 2003 Scalable Networking Pack has
> struck yet again.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Steve Ens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 25, 2008 3:31 PM
> *To:* NT System Admin Issues
> *Subject:* Re: Server access
>
>
>
> Found the problemunplugged one of the NIC's...instant access.  I might
> have to try to update the driversodd that it only stopped working after
> the updates, there were no new drivers installed.  Maybe a call to HP would
> be in order.
>
> On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 2:15 PM, Peter van Houten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> Windows XP SP3 on clients?  I am seeing this behaviour sporadically but
> haven't managed to pin it down to SP3.
>
> On the 25/06/2008 21:05, Steve Ens wrote the following:
>
>
>
> For some strange reason some users have lost access to our SQL 2005 server.
>  While some users can still use their applications and databases, others
> can't even view the shared folder through network neighbourhood.  I ran
> updates on the server (2003) last night, and today there are issues.  I've
> made sure there are no firewalls active on any of the clients or the server.
>  I've gone so far as to remove the Trend client on the server.  The server
> in question is using the HP NIC teaming.  I can ping the server and RDP to
> it, but my other tech can't.  Any good places to continue my search?
> Thanks
>
>
>
> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> ~   ~
>
>
>
>

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: NOD32 v2 definition issue?

[Tim Evans]

3218 fixed our issues here

 

 

...Tim

 

From: Durf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 12:48 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: NOD32 v2 definition issue?

 

Latest defs still popping false positives.  Anyone got anything on this?


-- Durf

On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 12:57 PM, Jon Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

Rescanned my local system and the file that popped up for me the first
time did not pop up this time.  Definitions were updated to the 3218.
Now to go back and check the server.

 

Jon

On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 12:32 PM, Jon Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

The server seeing all the errors is on 3217 though.

 

Jon

On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 12:32 PM, Jon Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

I am on 3218 definitions at the moment I am hoping that it
passed through to that one as well.

 

Jon

On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 12:23 PM, Andy Ognenoff
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

There is a problem with the 3217 definitions.  I saw a post
about it on the
Wilder Security Forums.  Causing me a headache too...

 - Andy O.


From: Jon Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 11:09 AM

To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: NOD32 v2 definition issue?





~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

 

 

 




-- 
--
Give a man a fish, and he'll eat for a day. 
Give a fish a man, and he'll eat for weeks! 


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Re: NTBackup failing on large files

[David W. McSpadden]

Didn't help.
When I stopped VSS backup wouldn't even run.
When I went to the S: drive and reviewed the Shadow tab is was already disabled.
I enabled and disabled it again and the backup still failed.



  - Original Message - 
  From: Joseph L. Casale 
  To: NT System Admin Issues 
  Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 2:09 PM
  Subject: RE: NTBackup failing on large files


  Right click the drive, choose properties, but I would disable the service for 
your test to safely rule it out, as another drives issues cause the *whole* 
system to misbehave.
  jlc

   

  From: David W. McSpadden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 11:26 AM
  To: NT System Admin Issues
  Subject: Re: NTBackup failing on large files

   

  The obvious is that no it isn't in use and not written to half way through.

  Windows Batch file runs the process.  The Call to SQL backup has to finish 
and wait 10 minute before the Windows backup can ever run.

  Now the not so obvious.  How does this brain dead dumb admin check and 
disable the VSS?

   

- Original Message - 

From: Joseph L. Casale 

To: NT System Admin Issues 

Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 12:29 PM

Subject: RE: NTBackup failing on large files

 

So stating the obvious, the file isn't in use, or overwritten halfway 
through?

You said VSS, AKA the devil? If you have vss enabled on a volume with large 
files like that, or many files (or actually at all ) *with out* 
redirecting copies to a physically different spindle (set of) you will surely 
have issues, I did.

 

Disable VSS, and attempt a dump to tape, let me know how it works...

 

jlc




From: David W. McSpadden [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 10:04 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: NTBackup failing on large files

Last firmware updates were done in February.  Everything was up to date 
then.

I am thinking it might be a VSS issue or just NTBackup.exe.  I have seen 
several articles stating 

the NTBackup is in need of a hotfix.  My past production servers had 
trouble with RSM not NTBackup.

I am thinking a call to MS is coming soon.

  - Original Message - 

  From: HELP_PC 

  To: NT System Admin Issues 

  Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 11:45 AM

  Subject: R: NTBackup failing on large files

   

  Just 2 other things :updated last firmware for the LTO and disks from HP 
FIRMWARE DISK (8.0)?

   

  GuidoElia

  HELPPC

   

   


--

  Da: David W. McSpadden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  Inviato: mercoledì 25 giugno 2008 16.09
  A: NT System Admin Issues
  Oggetto: Re: NTBackup failing on large files

  Tried to a USB got the same.

  LTO has own card and own bus on the motherboard.

- Original Message - 

From: HELP_PC 

To: NT System Admin Issues 

Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 10:04 AM

Subject: R: NTBackup failing on large files

 

Try a backup to other media (i.e. disk). Has the LTO a separate card ?

 

GuidoElia

HELPPC

 

 




Da: David W. McSpadden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Inviato: mercoledì 25 giugno 2008 15.54
A: NT System Admin Issues
Oggetto: Re: NTBackup failing on large files

Maintenance plan within SQL 2000 Enterprise.

  - Original Message - 

  From: Webster 

  To: NT System Admin Issues 

  Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 9:53 AM

  Subject: RE: NTBackup failing on large files

   

   

  From: David W. McSpadden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  Subject: NTBackup failing on large files

   

  I am running Windows Server Enterprise 2003.

  I am running SQL Enterprise 2003.

  On a 32 bit install.

  I run SQL backup everynight.

  I have a 60GB backup file for my production database.

  I run NTBackup and it backup up all the databases except the 
Production database.

  It runs for about 2 hours backing it up and then fails within about 
300 Mb of finishing stating the file is inconsistant.

  Has anyone seen this?

   

  When you say "I run SQL backup everynight", do you mean you use a SQL 
maintenance plan to run a backup or you backup the actual database with 
NTBackup?

   

   

  Webster

   



__



This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are property of Indiana Members 
Credit Union, are confidential, and are intended solely for the use of the 

RE: NOD32 v2 definition issue?

[Stefan Jafs]

Not here! I have 200 Desktops on 3218 and 2 stragglers on 3217 with no
Virus Alerts in 4 Hours.

 

__
Stefan Jafs

 

From: Durf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 15:48
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: NOD32 v2 definition issue?

 

Latest defs still popping false positives.  Anyone got anything on this?


-- Durf

On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 12:57 PM, Jon Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

Rescanned my local system and the file that popped up for me the first
time did not pop up this time.  Definitions were updated to the 3218.
Now to go back and check the server.

 

Jon

On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 12:32 PM, Jon Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

The server seeing all the errors is on 3217 though.

 

Jon

On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 12:32 PM, Jon Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

I am on 3218 definitions at the moment I am hoping that it
passed through to that one as well.

 

Jon

On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 12:23 PM, Andy Ognenoff
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

There is a problem with the 3217 definitions.  I saw a post
about it on the
Wilder Security Forums.  Causing me a headache too...

 - Andy O.


From: Jon Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 11:09 AM

To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: NOD32 v2 definition issue?





~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

 

 

 




-- 
--
Give a man a fish, and he'll eat for a day. 
Give a fish a man, and he'll eat for weeks! 




This email and any attached files are confidential and intended solely for the 
intended recipient(s). If you are not the named recipient you should not read, 
distribute, copy or alter this email. Any views or opinions expressed in this 
email are those of the author and do not represent those of the Amico 
Corpoartion company. Warning: Although precautions have been taken to make sure 
no viruses are present in this email, the company cannot accept responsibility 
for any loss or damage that arise from the use of this email or attachments.
~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Re: NOD32 v2 definition issue?

[Durf]

Latest defs still popping false positives.  Anyone got anything on this?

-- Durf

On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 12:57 PM, Jon Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Rescanned my local system and the file that popped up for me the first time
> did not pop up this time.  Definitions were updated to the 3218.  Now to go
> back and check the server.
>
> Jon
>
> On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 12:32 PM, Jon Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>  The server seeing all the errors is on 3217 though.
>>
>> Jon
>>
>>  On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 12:32 PM, Jon Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I am on 3218 definitions at the moment I am hoping that it passed through
>>> to that one as well.
>>>
>>> Jon
>>>
>>>   On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 12:23 PM, Andy Ognenoff <
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
 There is a problem with the 3217 definitions.  I saw a post about it on
 the
 Wilder Security Forums.  Causing me a headache too…

  - Andy O.
 
 From: Jon Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 11:09 AM
 To: NT System Admin Issues
 Subject: NOD32 v2 definition issue?




 ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
 ~   ~

>>>
>>>
>>
>


-- 
--
Give a man a fish, and he'll eat for a day.
Give a fish a man, and he'll eat for weeks!

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: Server access

[Kennedy, Jim]

Sounds like Microsoft Windows Server 2003 Scalable Networking Pack has struck 
yet again.


From: Steve Ens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 3:31 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Server access

Found the problemunplugged one of the NIC's...instant access.  I might have 
to try to update the driversodd that it only stopped working after the 
updates, there were no new drivers installed.  Maybe a call to HP would be in 
order.
On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 2:15 PM, Peter van Houten <[EMAIL 
PROTECTED]> wrote:
Windows XP SP3 on clients?  I am seeing this behaviour sporadically but haven't 
managed to pin it down to SP3.

On the 25/06/2008 21:05, Steve Ens wrote the following:

For some strange reason some users have lost access to our SQL 2005 server.  
While some users can still use their applications and databases, others can't 
even view the shared folder through network neighbourhood.  I ran updates on 
the server (2003) last night, and today there are issues.  I've made sure there 
are no firewalls active on any of the clients or the server.  I've gone so far 
as to remove the Trend client on the server.  The server in question is using 
the HP NIC teaming.  I can ping the server and RDP to it, but my other tech 
can't.  Any good places to continue my search?
Thanks

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Re: Server access

[Steve Ens]

Found the problemunplugged one of the NIC's...instant access.  I might
have to try to update the driversodd that it only stopped working after
the updates, there were no new drivers installed.  Maybe a call to HP would
be in order.

On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 2:15 PM, Peter van Houten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

> Windows XP SP3 on clients?  I am seeing this behaviour sporadically but
> haven't managed to pin it down to SP3.
>
> On the 25/06/2008 21:05, Steve Ens wrote the following:
>
>> For some strange reason some users have lost access to our SQL 2005
>> server.  While some users can still use their applications and databases,
>> others can't even view the shared folder through network neighbourhood.  I
>> ran updates on the server (2003) last night, and today there are issues.
>>  I've made sure there are no firewalls active on any of the clients or the
>> server.  I've gone so far as to remove the Trend client on the server.  The
>> server in question is using the HP NIC teaming.  I can ping the server and
>> RDP to it, but my other tech can't.  Any good places to continue my search?
>> Thanks
>>
>
>
> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> ~   ~
>

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Re: Server access

[Peter van Houten]

Windows XP SP3 on clients?  I am seeing this behaviour sporadically but 
haven't managed to pin it down to SP3.


On the 25/06/2008 21:05, Steve Ens wrote the following:
For some strange reason some users have lost access to our SQL 2005 
server.  While some users can still use their applications and 
databases, others can't even view the shared folder through network 
neighbourhood.  I ran updates on the server (2003) last night, and today 
there are issues.  I've made sure there are no firewalls active on any 
of the clients or the server.  I've gone so far as to remove the Trend 
client on the server.  The server in question is using the HP NIC 
teaming.  I can ping the server and RDP to it, but my other tech can't.  
Any good places to continue my search?

Thanks



~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Server access

[Steve Ens]

For some strange reason some users have lost access to our SQL 2005 server.
While some users can still use their applications and databases, others
can't even view the shared folder through network neighbourhood.  I ran
updates on the server (2003) last night, and today there are issues.  I've
made sure there are no firewalls active on any of the clients or the
server.  I've gone so far as to remove the Trend client on the server.  The
server in question is using the HP NIC teaming.  I can ping the server and
RDP to it, but my other tech can't.  Any good places to continue my search?
Thanks

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: Kaspersky AV

[Christopher J. Bosak]

Honestly, I think you fell into the NOD32 crowd here.

 

Christopher J. Bosak

Vector Company

c. 847.603.4673

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

 

"You need to install an RTFM Interface, due to an LBNC issue."

- B.O.F.H. (Merged 2 into 1) - Me

 

From: vbs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 12:22 hrs
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Kaspersky AV

 

Anyone using or familar with Kaspersky's AV business products suites?

 

I am considering a shift for some of my customers from Trend or Symantec to
there products as they support a managed environment on both peer to peer
and Domain environments. They are very agressive in their upgrade pricing
and the renewals are much less than Symantec.

 

I hope someone on the list had some first hand knowledge with them and felt
comfortable recommending the product and their support services.

-- 
Thanks
Dave Vantine 


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: SVN Remote Access

[Carl Houseman]

It wasn't clear that you were talking about running it under Apache.
Subversion server is a thing unto itself that doesn't require any Apache
server, according to what I found.  Maybe it can be SSL secured under
Apache, I didn't google that angle.  But you can:

 

http://www.google.com/search?q=subversion+apache+ssl

 

As a general rule, unless it's a public website, a mail server, or locked
down (no uploads) ftp server, or restricted to specific static client IPs,
it should wrapped in some kind of encryption. 

 

 

From: Sam Cayze [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 2:19 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: SVN Remote Access

 

"Can you certify and maintain the security of the machine running the
Subversion server?"

The subversion Server is what is running on my server that he wants access
to.  He runs the client on his laptop.

 

Thanks.  I was hoping since it ran Apache it might actually do some decent
security!

 

No I don't want a hole in my network, why do I think I am researching this?
;)   What kinda question is that?

 

 

 

 

From: Carl Houseman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 1:11 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: SVN Remote Access

 

2 minutes of googling tells me it's not secure.  It's just another TCP
server that responds on a particular port.

 

The question is, do you want a potential security hole into your network?
Can you certify and maintain the security of the machine running the
Subversion server?

 

Put a VPN around it.

 

Carl

 

From: Sam Cayze [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 1:59 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: SVN Remote Access

 

A developer is asking for the SVN port to be opened on the firewall so he
can access his repositories remotely and not RDP into the server.

 

Has anybody set this up?  Does it use HTTPS and is it secure, or should
SSH/VPN be put in place?

 

I'm have a lot to learn when it comes to SVN...   

 

 TIA

 

 

Sam Cayze
Information Technology Administrator
ROLLOUTS
ONSITE . ON DEMAND

 

952.279.6218...Direct Dial
612.386.3946...Mobile
877.471.6495...eFax
 http://www.Rollouts.com> www.Rollouts.com
  www.e-Technicians.net

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email and any attachment(s) are intended only
for the designated recipient(s).   Rollouts Incorporated prohibits use,
distribution or transmittal by or to an unintended recipient without
Rollouts' express written approval.  If you are not the intended recipient,
please delete this email and notify Rollouts.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: VMWare / Virtualization

[Benjamin Zachary - Lists]

To add to that, a well configured vmware box can arguably perform better in
certain environments if you can take advantage of the vswitch capabilities.
While you have a front end app with a back end database you could put those
on the SAME vm and create virtual NICs that never touch the network
interface it just gets 'switched' over from one box to the next, your
throughput goes up significantly as well as your not using that same 1gb
port for the incoming connections *and* the outgoing backend connection.

I have ported over just about everything, including systems with hardware
devices, like serial port devices (vmware server though) although I wouldn't
do it as a rule of thumb. 

If you plan to take advantage of the Vmotion and DRS features of vmware, you
could theoretically simply put one vm on a physical box, and have it fail
over to another, so you gain the auto failover as well as you could in event
of failure of other systems use that machine with its stand alone vm as the
designated 'temporary' area for other vm's during a vmotion or drs period.

So while putting 5-10 servers on a physical box is GREAT, you could also
benefit on the devices that cant really share resources on a full time basis
but be used in a limited scenario. 






~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: SVN Remote Access

[Sam Cayze]

"Can you certify and maintain the security of the machine running the
Subversion server?"

The subversion Server is what is running on my server that he wants
access to.  He runs the client on his laptop.

 

Thanks.  I was hoping since it ran Apache it might actually do some
decent security!

 

No I don't want a hole in my network, why do I think I am researching
this?  ;)   What kinda question is that?

 

 

 

 

From: Carl Houseman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 1:11 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: SVN Remote Access

 

2 minutes of googling tells me it's not secure.  It's just another TCP
server that responds on a particular port.

 

The question is, do you want a potential security hole into your
network?  Can you certify and maintain the security of the machine
running the Subversion server?

 

Put a VPN around it.

 

Carl

 

From: Sam Cayze [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 1:59 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: SVN Remote Access

 

A developer is asking for the SVN port to be opened on the firewall so
he can access his repositories remotely and not RDP into the server.

 

Has anybody set this up?  Does it use HTTPS and is it secure, or should
SSH/VPN be put in place?

 

I'm have a lot to learn when it comes to SVN...   

 

 TIA

 

 

Sam Cayze
Information Technology Administrator
ROLLOUTS
ONSITE * ON DEMAND

 

952.279.6218...Direct Dial
612.386.3946...Mobile
877.471.6495...eFax
www.Rollouts.com http://www.Rollouts.com> 
www.e-Technicians.net  

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email and any attachment(s) are intended
only for the designated recipient(s).   Rollouts Incorporated prohibits
use, distribution or transmittal by or to an unintended recipient
without Rollouts' express written approval.  If you are not the intended
recipient, please delete this email and notify Rollouts.

 

 

 

 

 

 

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: NTBackup failing on large files

[Joseph L. Casale]

Right click the drive, choose properties, but I would disable the service for 
your test to safely rule it out, as another drives issues cause the *whole* 
system to misbehave.
jlc

From: David W. McSpadden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 11:26 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: NTBackup failing on large files

The obvious is that no it isn't in use and not written to half way through.
Windows Batch file runs the process.  The Call to SQL backup has to finish and 
wait 10 minute before the Windows backup can ever run.
Now the not so obvious.  How does this brain dead dumb admin check and disable 
the VSS?

- Original Message -
From: Joseph L. Casale
To: NT System Admin Issues
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 12:29 PM
Subject: RE: NTBackup failing on large files

So stating the obvious, the file isn't in use, or overwritten halfway through?
You said VSS, AKA the devil? If you have vss enabled on a volume with large 
files like that, or many files (or actually at all ) *with out* 
redirecting copies to a physically different spindle (set of) you will surely 
have issues, I did.

Disable VSS, and attempt a dump to tape, let me know how it works...

jlc

From: David W. McSpadden [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 10:04 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: NTBackup failing on large files
Last firmware updates were done in February.  Everything was up to date then.
I am thinking it might be a VSS issue or just NTBackup.exe.  I have seen 
several articles stating
the NTBackup is in need of a hotfix.  My past production servers had trouble 
with RSM not NTBackup.
I am thinking a call to MS is coming soon.
- Original Message -
From: HELP_PC
To: NT System Admin Issues
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 11:45 AM
Subject: R: NTBackup failing on large files

Just 2 other things :updated last firmware for the LTO and disks from HP 
FIRMWARE DISK (8.0)?

GuidoElia
HELPPC



Da: David W. McSpadden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Inviato: mercoledì 25 giugno 2008 16.09
A: NT System Admin Issues
Oggetto: Re: NTBackup failing on large files
Tried to a USB got the same.
LTO has own card and own bus on the motherboard.
- Original Message -
From: HELP_PC
To: NT System Admin Issues
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 10:04 AM
Subject: R: NTBackup failing on large files

Try a backup to other media (i.e. disk). Has the LTO a separate card ?

GuidoElia
HELPPC



Da: David W. McSpadden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Inviato: mercoledì 25 giugno 2008 15.54
A: NT System Admin Issues
Oggetto: Re: NTBackup failing on large files
Maintenance plan within SQL 2000 Enterprise.
- Original Message -
From: Webster
To: NT System Admin Issues
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 9:53 AM
Subject: RE: NTBackup failing on large files


From: David W. McSpadden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: NTBackup failing on large files

I am running Windows Server Enterprise 2003.
I am running SQL Enterprise 2003.
On a 32 bit install.
I run SQL backup everynight.
I have a 60GB backup file for my production database.
I run NTBackup and it backup up all the databases except the Production 
database.
It runs for about 2 hours backing it up and then fails within about 300 Mb of 
finishing stating the file is inconsistant.
Has anyone seen this?

When you say "I run SQL backup everynight", do you mean you use a SQL 
maintenance plan to run a backup or you backup the actual database with 
NTBackup?


Webster







__










This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are property of Indiana Members 
Credit Union, are confidential, and are intended solely for the use of the 
individual or entity to whom this e-mail is addressed. If you are not one of 
the named recipient(s) or otherwise have reason to believe that you have 
received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete this 
message immediately from your computer. Any other use, retention, 
dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this email is strictly 
prohibited.










This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.





For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email





__


















__










This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are property of Indiana Members 
Credit Union, are confidential, and are intended solely for the use of the 
individual or entity to whom this e-mail is addressed. If you are not on

RE: SVN Remote Access

[Carl Houseman]

2 minutes of googling tells me it's not secure.  It's just another TCP
server that responds on a particular port.

 

The question is, do you want a potential security hole into your network?
Can you certify and maintain the security of the machine running the
Subversion server?

 

Put a VPN around it.

 

Carl

 

From: Sam Cayze [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 1:59 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: SVN Remote Access

 

A developer is asking for the SVN port to be opened on the firewall so he
can access his repositories remotely and not RDP into the server.

 

Has anybody set this up?  Does it use HTTPS and is it secure, or should
SSH/VPN be put in place?

 

I'm have a lot to learn when it comes to SVN...   

 

 TIA

 

 

Sam Cayze
Information Technology Administrator
ROLLOUTS
ONSITE . ON DEMAND

 

952.279.6218...Direct Dial
612.386.3946...Mobile
877.471.6495...eFax
 http://www.Rollouts.com> www.Rollouts.com
  www.e-Technicians.net

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email and any attachment(s) are intended only
for the designated recipient(s).   Rollouts Incorporated prohibits use,
distribution or transmittal by or to an unintended recipient without
Rollouts' express written approval.  If you are not the intended recipient,
please delete this email and notify Rollouts.

 

 

 

 

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Re: Page file of Exchange 2003, 1.05 times the RAM or 1.5 times?

[Ajay Kulsh]

Michael,

Here is the link to which ExPBA points:

"PageFile Size Larger Than Total Physical Memory"
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb738135.aspx

ExPBA keeps giving error that pagefile is too large, so it needs to be fixed 
as well.


Jay

- Original Message - 
From: "Michael B. Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "NT System Admin Issues" 
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 4:14 AM
Subject: RE: Page file of Exchange 2003, 1.05 times the RAM or 1.5 times?




1.5 is the right number. Can you tell me the rule number link, so I can 
have

it fixed?

Regards,

Michael B. Smith
MCITP:EM/MCSE/Exchange MVP
http://TheEssentialExchange.com


-Original Message-
From: Ajay Kulsh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 10:39 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Page file of Exchange 2003, 1.05 times the RAM or 1.5 times?

In most place, we read that the pagefile of a Windows server should be at
least 1.5 X RAM. However, latest version of ExBPA tool gives error in such 
a

case and tell us to make pagefile only 1.05 X RAM.

Should we reduce the file size on Exchange server to only 1.05 X RAM?
Thanks.

Jay Kulsh
So. Pasadena, CA



~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~





~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: How to modify DFS target

[Chris.Bodnar]

Brian,

 

I've done some testing and it looks like I should be able to script this
with DFSCMD. The /add switch will add an additional target. I plan on
doing 2 scripts. One that will add the new target , then I'll manually
verify they are correct. Then run a 2nd script to delete the original
target using the /remove switch.

 

Thanks 

 

 

Chris Bodnar 
Sr. Windows Systems Engineer 
Swiftwater, PA 
X3522 



From: Webb, Brian (Corp) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 12:50 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: How to modify DFS target

 

Yes.  What you are seeing is the behavior I've always seen.  You have to
create a new target and delete the old.

 

-Brian

 

 



From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 1:55 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: How to modify DFS target

I don't see a way to modify the target path of a DFS link. I have
recently migrated 2 stand alone file servers into a MS cluster. I have
aliased the names so users weren't affected. What I would like to do, is
clean up the DFS paths. They still reference the old server names, which
the cluster is responding to. I thought I could script this but I see no
way to do this with the DFS WMI providers or DFSCMD.  The only way I can
see to do this manually is add a 2nd target for the existing link, then
delete the first target. 

Has anyone run into this before? 

 

Thanks,

Chris Bodnar

Sr. Windows Systems Engineer

Swiftwater, PA

X3522

This communication, including any attachments, is intended solely for
the use of the addressee and may contain information which is
privileged, confidential, exempt from disclosure under applicable law or
subject to copyright. If you are not an intended recipient, any use,
disclosure, distribution, reproduction, review or copying is
unauthorized and may be unlawful. If you have received this transmission
in error, please notify the sender immediately. Thank you.

Cette communication,y compris les pieces jointes, est reservee a l'usage
exclusif du destinataire et peut contenir des informations privilegiees,
confidentielles, exemptees de divulgation selon la loi ou protegees par
les droits de publication. Si vous n'etes pas un destinataire, toute
utilisation, divulgation, distribution, reproduction, examen ou copie
est non-autorisee et peut etre illegale. Si vous avez recu cette
communication par erreur, veuillez aviser l'expediteur immediatement.
Merci. 

 

 

 
 
This communication, including any attachments, is intended solely for the use 
of the addressee and may contain information which is privileged, confidential, 
exempt from disclosure under applicable law or subject to copyright. If you are 
not an intended recipient, any use, disclosure, distribution, reproduction, 
review or copying is unauthorized and may be unlawful. If you have received 
this transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately. Thank you.

Cette communication,y compris les pieces jointes, est reservee a l'usage 
exclusif du destinataire et peut contenir des informations privilegiees, 
confidentielles, exemptees de divulgation selon la loi ou protegees par les 
droits de publication. Si vous n'etes pas un destinataire, toute utilisation, 
divulgation, distribution, reproduction, examen ou copie est non-autorisee et 
peut etre illegale. Si vous avez recu cette communication par erreur, veuillez 
aviser l'expediteur immediatement. Merci.


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

SVN Remote Access

[Sam Cayze]

A developer is asking for the SVN port to be opened on the firewall so
he can access his repositories remotely and not RDP into the server.
 
Has anybody set this up?  Does it use HTTPS and is it secure, or should
SSH/VPN be put in place?
 
I'm have a lot to learn when it comes to SVN...   
 

 TIA

 

 

Sam Cayze
Information Technology Administrator
ROLLOUTS
ONSITE * ON DEMAND

952.279.6218...Direct Dial
612.386.3946...Mobile
877.471.6495...eFax
www.Rollouts.com http://www.Rollouts.com> 
www.e-Technicians.net  

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email and any attachment(s) are intended
only for the designated recipient(s).   Rollouts Incorporated prohibits
use, distribution or transmittal by or to an unintended recipient
without Rollouts' express written approval.  If you are not the intended
recipient, please delete this email and notify Rollouts.




 

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: Page file of Exchange 2003, 1.05 times the RAM or 1.5 times?

[Todd Lemmiksoo]

What would go wrong if the page file was larger than 1.5 times memory?
Ex4gig pagefile for 2gb memory.

Todd 

-Original Message-
From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 7:14 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Page file of Exchange 2003, 1.05 times the RAM or 1.5
times?

1.5 is the right number. Can you tell me the rule number link, so I can
have it fixed?

Regards,

Michael B. Smith
MCITP:EM/MCSE/Exchange MVP
http://TheEssentialExchange.com


-Original Message-
From: Ajay Kulsh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 10:39 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Page file of Exchange 2003, 1.05 times the RAM or 1.5 times?

In most place, we read that the pagefile of a Windows server should be
at least 1.5 X RAM. However, latest version of ExBPA tool gives error in
such a case and tell us to make pagefile only 1.05 X RAM.

Should we reduce the file size on Exchange server to only 1.05 X RAM?
Thanks.

Jay Kulsh
So. Pasadena, CA



~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Re: NTBackup failing on large files

[David W. McSpadden]

The obvious is that no it isn't in use and not written to half way through.
Windows Batch file runs the process.  The Call to SQL backup has to finish and 
wait 10 minute before the Windows backup can ever run.
Now the not so obvious.  How does this brain dead dumb admin check and disable 
the VSS?

  - Original Message - 
  From: Joseph L. Casale 
  To: NT System Admin Issues 
  Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 12:29 PM
  Subject: RE: NTBackup failing on large files


  So stating the obvious, the file isn't in use, or overwritten halfway through?

  You said VSS, AKA the devil? If you have vss enabled on a volume with large 
files like that, or many files (or actually at all ) *with out* 
redirecting copies to a physically different spindle (set of) you will surely 
have issues, I did.

  Disable VSS, and attempt a dump to tape, let me know how it works...

  jlc

--
  From: David W. McSpadden [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 10:04 AM
  To: NT System Admin Issues
  Subject: Re: NTBackup failing on large files


  Last firmware updates were done in February.  Everything was up to date then.
  I am thinking it might be a VSS issue or just NTBackup.exe.  I have seen 
several articles stating 
  the NTBackup is in need of a hotfix.  My past production servers had trouble 
with RSM not NTBackup.
  I am thinking a call to MS is coming soon.
- Original Message - 
From: HELP_PC 
To: NT System Admin Issues 
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 11:45 AM
Subject: R: NTBackup failing on large files


Just 2 other things :updated last firmware for the LTO and disks from HP 
FIRMWARE DISK (8.0)?

GuidoElia
HELPPC





Da: David W. McSpadden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Inviato: mercoledì 25 giugno 2008 16.09
A: NT System Admin Issues
Oggetto: Re: NTBackup failing on large files


Tried to a USB got the same.
LTO has own card and own bus on the motherboard.
  - Original Message - 
  From: HELP_PC 
  To: NT System Admin Issues 
  Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 10:04 AM
  Subject: R: NTBackup failing on large files


  Try a backup to other media (i.e. disk). Has the LTO a separate card ?

  GuidoElia
  HELPPC




--
  Da: David W. McSpadden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  Inviato: mercoledì 25 giugno 2008 15.54
  A: NT System Admin Issues
  Oggetto: Re: NTBackup failing on large files


  Maintenance plan within SQL 2000 Enterprise.
- Original Message - 
From: Webster 
To: NT System Admin Issues 
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 9:53 AM
Subject: RE: NTBackup failing on large files




From: David W. McSpadden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Subject: NTBackup failing on large files



I am running Windows Server Enterprise 2003.

I am running SQL Enterprise 2003.

On a 32 bit install.

I run SQL backup everynight.

I have a 60GB backup file for my production database.

I run NTBackup and it backup up all the databases except the Production 
database.

It runs for about 2 hours backing it up and then fails within about 300 
Mb of finishing stating the file is inconsistant.

Has anyone seen this?



When you say “I run SQL backup everynight”, do you mean you use a SQL 
maintenance plan to run a backup or you backup the actual database with 
NTBackup?





Webster






__

This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are property of Indiana Members 
Credit Union, are confidential, and are intended solely for the use of the 
individual or entity to whom this e-mail is addressed. If you are not one of 
the named recipient(s) or otherwise have reason to believe that you have 
received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete this 
message immediately from your computer. Any other use, retention, 
dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this email is strictly 
prohibited.

This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 
__












__

This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are property of Indiana Members 
Credit Union, are confidential, and are intended solely for the use of the 
individual or entity to whom this e-mail is addressed. If you are not one of 
the named recipient(s) or otherwise have reason to believe that you have 
received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete this 
message immediately from your computer. 

Kaspersky AV

[vbs]

Anyone using or familar with Kaspersky's AV business products suites?

I am considering a shift for some of my customers from Trend or Symantec to
there products as they support a managed environment on both peer to peer
and Domain environments. They are very agressive in their upgrade pricing
and the renewals are much less than Symantec.

I hope someone on the list had some first hand knowledge with them and felt
comfortable recommending the product and their support services.

-- 
Thanks
Dave Vantine

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Re: NOD32 v2 definition issue?

[Jon Harris]

Rescanned my local system and the file that popped up for me the first time
did not pop up this time.  Definitions were updated to the 3218.  Now to go
back and check the server.

Jon

On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 12:32 PM, Jon Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>  The server seeing all the errors is on 3217 though.
>
> Jon
>
>  On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 12:32 PM, Jon Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I am on 3218 definitions at the moment I am hoping that it passed through
>> to that one as well.
>>
>> Jon
>>
>>   On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 12:23 PM, Andy Ognenoff <
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> There is a problem with the 3217 definitions.  I saw a post about it on
>>> the
>>> Wilder Security Forums.  Causing me a headache too…
>>>
>>>  - Andy O.
>>> 
>>> From: Jon Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 11:09 AM
>>> To: NT System Admin Issues
>>> Subject: NOD32 v2 definition issue?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
>>> ~   ~
>>>
>>
>>
>

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: How to modify DFS target

[Webb, Brian (Corp)]

Yes.  What you are seeing is the behavior I've always seen.  You have to
create a new target and delete the old.
 
-Brian

 



From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 1:55 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: How to modify DFS target



I don't see a way to modify the target path of a DFS link. I have
recently migrated 2 stand alone file servers into a MS cluster. I have
aliased the names so users weren't affected. What I would like to do, is
clean up the DFS paths. They still reference the old server names, which
the cluster is responding to. I thought I could script this but I see no
way to do this with the DFS WMI providers or DFSCMD.  The only way I can
see to do this manually is add a 2nd target for the existing link, then
delete the first target. 

Has anyone run into this before? 



Thanks,

Chris Bodnar

Sr. Windows Systems Engineer

Swiftwater, PA

X3522

This communication, including any attachments, is intended solely for
the use of the addressee and may contain information which is
privileged, confidential, exempt from disclosure under applicable law or
subject to copyright. If you are not an intended recipient, any use,
disclosure, distribution, reproduction, review or copying is
unauthorized and may be unlawful. If you have received this transmission
in error, please notify the sender immediately. Thank you.

Cette communication,y compris les pieces jointes, est reservee a l'usage
exclusif du destinataire et peut contenir des informations privilegiees,
confidentielles, exemptees de divulgation selon la loi ou protegees par
les droits de publication. Si vous n'etes pas un destinataire, toute
utilisation, divulgation, distribution, reproduction, examen ou copie
est non-autorisee et peut etre illegale. Si vous avez recu cette
communication par erreur, veuillez aviser l'expediteur immediatement.
Merci. 




~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: New Group Policy Preference Extensions and WSUS. RESOLVED

[Kennedy, Jim]

I was just writing a reply to my first message when you sent this.no we are 
on SP2. My problem was the update was not even showing up in the WSUS server.

The fix was to add the Feature Packs category and sync. Odd that the Vista one 
and the XP 64 bit one showed up without that and the XP one is in that 
categoryit says Vista and XP 64 are feature pack category items also, 
but they were both there before I added that category. Going to write this on 
off as gremlins and move on :)

I just found that catalog site in my searches on this issue. That is one 
awesome link.

JK


> -Original Message-
> From: Scott Klassen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 12:42 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: re: New Group Policy Preference Extensions and WSUS.
>
> I'm guessing you must be on XP SP3.
>
> The GPP CSE install package still hasn't been updated to detect SP3.
> You'll have to manually download and install it.
>
> To get the latest release version, I always grab from the WU catalog
> site:  http://catalog.update.microsoft.com/v7/site/Home.aspx
>
> Scott Klassen
> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> ~   ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

re: New Group Policy Preference Extensions and WSUS.

[Scott Klassen]

I'm guessing you must be on XP SP3.

The GPP CSE install package still hasn't been updated to detect SP3.  You'll 
have to manually download and install it.

To get the latest release version, I always grab from the WU catalog site:  
http://catalog.update.microsoft.com/v7/site/Home.aspx

Scott Klassen
~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: NTBackup failing on large files

[Joseph L. Casale]

So stating the obvious, the file isn't in use, or overwritten halfway through?
You said VSS, AKA the devil? If you have vss enabled on a volume with large 
files like that, or many files (or actually at all ) *with out* 
redirecting copies to a physically different spindle (set of) you will surely 
have issues, I did.

Disable VSS, and attempt a dump to tape, let me know how it works...

jlc

From: David W. McSpadden [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 10:04 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: NTBackup failing on large files

Last firmware updates were done in February.  Everything was up to date then.
I am thinking it might be a VSS issue or just NTBackup.exe.  I have seen 
several articles stating
the NTBackup is in need of a hotfix.  My past production servers had trouble 
with RSM not NTBackup.
I am thinking a call to MS is coming soon.
- Original Message -
From: HELP_PC
To: NT System Admin Issues
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 11:45 AM
Subject: R: NTBackup failing on large files

Just 2 other things :updated last firmware for the LTO and disks from HP 
FIRMWARE DISK (8.0)?

GuidoElia
HELPPC



Da: David W. McSpadden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Inviato: mercoledì 25 giugno 2008 16.09
A: NT System Admin Issues
Oggetto: Re: NTBackup failing on large files

Tried to a USB got the same.
LTO has own card and own bus on the motherboard.
- Original Message -
From: HELP_PC
To: NT System Admin Issues
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 10:04 AM
Subject: R: NTBackup failing on large files

Try a backup to other media (i.e. disk). Has the LTO a separate card ?

GuidoElia
HELPPC



Da: David W. McSpadden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Inviato: mercoledì 25 giugno 2008 15.54
A: NT System Admin Issues
Oggetto: Re: NTBackup failing on large files

Maintenance plan within SQL 2000 Enterprise.
- Original Message -
From: Webster
To: NT System Admin Issues
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 9:53 AM
Subject: RE: NTBackup failing on large files


From: David W. McSpadden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: NTBackup failing on large files

I am running Windows Server Enterprise 2003.
I am running SQL Enterprise 2003.
On a 32 bit install.
I run SQL backup everynight.
I have a 60GB backup file for my production database.
I run NTBackup and it backup up all the databases except the Production 
database.
It runs for about 2 hours backing it up and then fails within about 300 Mb of 
finishing stating the file is inconsistant.
Has anyone seen this?

When you say “I run SQL backup everynight”, do you mean you use a SQL 
maintenance plan to run a backup or you backup the actual database with 
NTBackup?


Webster



__



This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are property of Indiana Members 
Credit Union, are confidential, and are intended solely for the use of the 
individual or entity to whom this e-mail is addressed. If you are not one of 
the named recipient(s) or otherwise have reason to believe that you have 
received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete this 
message immediately from your computer. Any other use, retention, 
dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this email is strictly 
prohibited.



This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.

For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email

__









__



This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are property of Indiana Members 
Credit Union, are confidential, and are intended solely for the use of the 
individual or entity to whom this e-mail is addressed. If you are not one of 
the named recipient(s) or otherwise have reason to believe that you have 
received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete this 
message immediately from your computer. Any other use, retention, 
dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this email is strictly 
prohibited.



This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.

For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email

__







__



This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are property of Indiana Members 
Credit Union, are confidential, and are intended solely for the use of the 
individual or entity to whom this e-mail is addressed. If you are not one of 
the named recipient(s) or otherwise have reason to believe that you have 
received this message in error

Re: NOD32 v2 definition issue?

[Jon Harris]

The server seeing all the errors is on 3217 though.

Jon

On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 12:32 PM, Jon Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I am on 3218 definitions at the moment I am hoping that it passed through
> to that one as well.
>
> Jon
>
>   On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 12:23 PM, Andy Ognenoff <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> There is a problem with the 3217 definitions.  I saw a post about it on
>> the
>> Wilder Security Forums.  Causing me a headache too…
>>
>>  - Andy O.
>> 
>> From: Jon Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 11:09 AM
>> To: NT System Admin Issues
>> Subject: NOD32 v2 definition issue?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
>> ~   ~
>>
>
>

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Re: NOD32 v2 definition issue?

[Jon Harris]

I am on 3218 definitions at the moment I am hoping that it passed through to
that one as well.

Jon

On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 12:23 PM, Andy Ognenoff <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> There is a problem with the 3217 definitions.  I saw a post about it on the
> Wilder Security Forums.  Causing me a headache too…
>
>  - Andy O.
> 
> From: Jon Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 11:09 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: NOD32 v2 definition issue?
>
>
>
>
> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> ~   ~
>

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: Citrix printing question

[Joe Heaton]

Ok, found within the WI settings where to remove that.  I have it set to
use the Local Client, so that the app opens in its own window. 


Joe Heaton

-Original Message-
From: Webster [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 8:58 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Citrix printing question

I have never used the Java client.  Just remove it from the list of
available clients because it is not "vital to being able to open apps".


Webster

> -Original Message-
> From: Joe Heaton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 10:52 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Citrix printing question
> 
> Ok, so after tracking down the error message on Citrix website, come 
> to find out I have no icajava folder at all.  Which, of course, is 
> vital to being able to open apps through the web client.  It's also 
> not on the CD I have.  I don't have the Components CD, and the Citrix 
> site is not very friendly to people with older versions...  Digging 
> continues.
> 
> 
> Joe Heaton
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Joe Heaton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 7:09 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Citrix printing question
> 
> Here's the error from Web Interface:
> 
> ERROR: An error has occurred while trying to launch the application.
> Please contact your administrator. Log ID: c79b0656
> 
> Looking at Event Viewer on the server gives me the following two
> errors:
> 
> 1) The MetaFrame Presentation Server Client for Java files could not 
> be located on the server. Please ensure that the client files have 
> been copied to the correct location. [Log ID: c79b0656]
> 
> 2) Your MetaFrame farm is not licensed to support workspace control.
> This was reported by the XML Service at address "http://Server:8080";.
> [Log ID: 8017e750]
> 
> The first one seems clear, I guess I need to throw the CD back in and 
> install the Java client?  I thought I had installed all client 
> versions, am I confused here?  Not sure what the second one means, 
> other than I'm not licensed to do the Web Interface?  I'm going to go 
> to Citrix site and see if I can get some answers, but if you have 
> those answers, I'd be happy to get them from you too...
> 
> I'm also going to do the policy change now, and let you know how that 
> goes.
> 
> 
> Joe Heaton
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Webster [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 6:49 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Citrix printing question
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Joe Heaton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: RE: Citrix printing question
> >
> > Don't recall the exact error, and I'm on the train headed home.  
> > I'll run it in the morning, and let you know.  I'll also try that 
> > change, and let you know how it goes.  Really appreciate the help.
> 
> Joe,
> 
> Have you had the time to try the policy change yet or get the Web 
> Interface error?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> 
> Webster
> 
> 
> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> ~   ~
> 
> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> ~   ~
> 
> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> ~   ~


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: NOD32 v2 definition issue?

[Andy Ognenoff]

There is a problem with the 3217 definitions.  I saw a post about it on the
Wilder Security Forums.  Causing me a headache too…

 - Andy O. 

From: Jon Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 11:09 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: NOD32 v2 definition issue?




~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: NOD32 v2 definition issue?

[Stefan Jafs]

Same here, trying to figure out what's going on.

 

__
Stefan Jafs

 

From: Jon Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 12:09
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: NOD32 v2 definition issue?

 

I am suddenly getting a lot if Trojans in particular the a variant of
Win32/Exploit.MSWord.Smtag trojan showing up in scans.  Some of these
files are years old some are new.  Anyone else getting these to show up
in DOC files?  Nightly scans up to now have never shown them.  I am
wondering if there has been a bad definition issued but Eset.

 

Jon




This email and any attached files are confidential and intended solely for the 
intended recipient(s). If you are not the named recipient you should not read, 
distribute, copy or alter this email. Any views or opinions expressed in this 
email are those of the author and do not represent those of the Amico 
Corpoartion company. Warning: Although precautions have been taken to make sure 
no viruses are present in this email, the company cannot accept responsibility 
for any loss or damage that arise from the use of this email or attachments.
~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

NOD32 v2 definition issue?

[Jon Harris]

I am suddenly getting a lot if Trojans in particular the a variant of
Win32/Exploit.MSWord.Smtag trojan showing up in scans.  Some of these files
are years old some are new.  Anyone else getting these to show up in DOC
files?  Nightly scans up to now have never shown them.  I am wondering if
there has been a bad definition issued but Eset.

Jon

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Re: NTBackup failing on large files

[David W. McSpadden]

Last firmware updates were done in February.  Everything was up to date then.
I am thinking it might be a VSS issue or just NTBackup.exe.  I have seen 
several articles stating 
the NTBackup is in need of a hotfix.  My past production servers had trouble 
with RSM not NTBackup.
I am thinking a call to MS is coming soon.
  - Original Message - 
  From: HELP_PC 
  To: NT System Admin Issues 
  Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 11:45 AM
  Subject: R: NTBackup failing on large files


  Just 2 other things :updated last firmware for the LTO and disks from HP 
FIRMWARE DISK (8.0)?

  GuidoElia
  HELPPC




--
  Da: David W. McSpadden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  Inviato: mercoledì 25 giugno 2008 16.09
  A: NT System Admin Issues
  Oggetto: Re: NTBackup failing on large files


  Tried to a USB got the same.
  LTO has own card and own bus on the motherboard.
- Original Message - 
From: HELP_PC 
To: NT System Admin Issues 
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 10:04 AM
Subject: R: NTBackup failing on large files


Try a backup to other media (i.e. disk). Has the LTO a separate card ?

GuidoElia
HELPPC





Da: David W. McSpadden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Inviato: mercoledì 25 giugno 2008 15.54
A: NT System Admin Issues
Oggetto: Re: NTBackup failing on large files


Maintenance plan within SQL 2000 Enterprise.
  - Original Message - 
  From: Webster 
  To: NT System Admin Issues 
  Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 9:53 AM
  Subject: RE: NTBackup failing on large files


   

  From: David W. McSpadden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  Subject: NTBackup failing on large files

   

  I am running Windows Server Enterprise 2003.

  I am running SQL Enterprise 2003.

  On a 32 bit install.

  I run SQL backup everynight.

  I have a 60GB backup file for my production database.

  I run NTBackup and it backup up all the databases except the Production 
database.

  It runs for about 2 hours backing it up and then fails within about 300 
Mb of finishing stating the file is inconsistant.

  Has anyone seen this?

   

  When you say "I run SQL backup everynight", do you mean you use a SQL 
maintenance plan to run a backup or you backup the actual database with 
NTBackup?

   

   

  Webster






__

This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are property of Indiana Members 
Credit Union, are confidential, and are intended solely for the use of the 
individual or entity to whom this e-mail is addressed. If you are not one of 
the named recipient(s) or otherwise have reason to believe that you have 
received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete this 
message immediately from your computer. Any other use, retention, 
dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this email is strictly 
prohibited.

This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 
__












__

This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are property of Indiana Members 
Credit Union, are confidential, and are intended solely for the use of the 
individual or entity to whom this e-mail is addressed. If you are not one of 
the named recipient(s) or otherwise have reason to believe that you have 
received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete this 
message immediately from your computer. Any other use, retention, 
dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this email is strictly 
prohibited.

This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 
__











__

This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are property of Indiana Members 
Credit Union, are confidential, and are intended solely for the use of the 
individual or entity to whom this e-mail is addressed. If you are not one of 
the named recipient(s) or otherwise have reason to believe that you have 
received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete this 
message immediately from your computer. Any other use, retention, 
dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this email is strictly 
prohibited.

This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 
__


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus 

Re: NTBackup failing on large files

[David W. McSpadden]

The HP Ultrium 1-SCSI SCSI Sequential Device [Tape drive] is connected to the 
LSI Logic PCI-X Ultra320 SCSI Host Adapter.
SQL runs on it's own volume D: (HP LOGICAL VOLUME SCSI Disk Device (73.37 GB) 
-- drive 2).
The Data files for the database are on volume J: (HP LOGICAL VOLUME SCSI Disk 
Device (513.62 GB) -- drive 0) or volume R: (HP LOGICAL VOLUME SCSI Disk Device 
(1027.47 GB) -- drive 5) and the log files for all the databases are on volume 
L: (HP LOGICAL VOLUME SCSI Disk Device (733.91 GB) -- drive 4).
SQL backups are stored on volume S: (HP LOGICAL VOLUME SCSI Disk Device (733.91 
GB) -- drive 6).
S:, L:, and R: are on one Storage Array 30.  S: has 6 SAS Drives at 10k RPM, L: 
has 6 SAS Drives at 10k RPM, R: has 8 SAS Drives at 10k RPM.  All are RAID 5.
J: in on it's own Storage Array 30. J: is RAID 1+0 with 20 SAS Drives at 15k 
RPM.
D: is on the same BUS as C: and both are mirrored 73Gb 15k RPM SAS Drives.
SQL reports no errors creating the backup and a restore of the backup file is 
completed daily to a report database to verify the .bak file on the S: is good.
Running NTBackup with the Tape Drive or the USB drive (W:) gets the same 
NTBackup errors: 

Backup Status
Operation: Backup
Active backup destination: LTO Ultrium
Media name: "Media created 6/24/2008 at 1:45 PM"

Volume shadow copy creation: Attempt 1.
Backup (via shadow copy) of "S: Backup Files"
Backup set #3 on media #1
Backup description: "Set created 6/24/2008 at 1:45 PM"
Media name: "Media created 6/24/2008 at 1:37 PM"

Backup Type: Normal

Backup started on 6/24/2008 at 1:45 PM.
WARNING: Portions of "\in01data\MonthendDump\in01databackup.BAK" cannot be 
read.  The backed up data is corrupt or incomplete.
This file will not restore correctly.
Backup completed on 6/24/2008 at 2:14 PM.
Directories: 3
Files: 1
Corrupt: 1
Bytes: 57,193,763,724
Time:  28 minutes and  53 seconds

--
I think it may have something to do with the volume shadow copy???






  Operating System   System Model 
  Windows Server 2003 Enterprise Edition Service Pack 2 (build 3790)   HP 
ProLiant DL580 G5 
  System Serial Number: USE804N0K7
  Chassis Serial Number: USE804N0K7
  Enclosure Type: Rack Mount Chassis 
  Processor a   Main Circuit Board b 
  2.40 gigahertz Intel Xeon (16 installed)
  64 kilobyte primary memory cache
  4096 kilobyte secondary memory cache   Bus Clock: 1066 megahertz
  BIOS: HP P61 12/07/2007 
  Drives   Memory Modules c,d 
  3846.03 Gigabytes Usable Hard Drive Capacity
  2786.31 Gigabytes Hard Drive Free Space

  HL-DT-ST DVDRAM GSA-T20L [CD-ROM drive]
  HP Ultrium 1-SCSI SCSI Sequential Device [Tape drive]

  HP LOGICAL VOLUME SCSI Disk Device (1027.47 GB) -- drive 5
  HP LOGICAL VOLUME SCSI Disk Device (733.91 GB) -- drive 4
  HP LOGICAL VOLUME SCSI Disk Device (440.34 GB) -- drive 3
  HP LOGICAL VOLUME SCSI Disk Device (73.37 GB) -- drive 1
  HP LOGICAL VOLUME SCSI Disk Device (513.62 GB) -- drive 0
  HP LOGICAL VOLUME SCSI Disk Device (733.91 GB) -- drive 6
  HP LOGICAL VOLUME SCSI Disk Device (73.37 GB) -- drive 2
  WD 2500BEV External USB Device [Hard drive] (250.06 GB) -- drive 7   
65534 Megabytes Installed Memory

  Slot 'DIMM 1A ' has 2048 MB
  Slot 'DIMM 2C ' has 2048 MB
  Slot 'DIMM 3E ' has 2048 MB
  Slot 'DIMM 4G ' has 2048 MB
  Slot 'Board 1, DIMM 1A' has 2048 MB
  Slot 'Board 1, DIMM 2B' has 2048 MB
  Slot 'Board 1, DIMM 3C' has 2048 MB
  Slot 'Board 1, DIMM 4D' has 2048 MB
  Slot 'DIMM 5A ' has 2048 MB
  Slot 'DIMM 6C ' has 2048 MB
  Slot 'DIMM 7E ' has 2048 MB
  Slot 'DIMM 8G ' has 2048 MB
  Slot 'Board 2, DIMM 1A' has 2048 MB
  Slot 'Board 2, DIMM 2B' has 2048 MB
  Slot 'Board 2, DIMM 3C' has 2048 MB
  Slot 'Board 2, DIMM 4D' has 2048 MB
  Slot 'DIMM 9B ' has 2048 MB
  Slot 'DIMM 10D ' has 2048 MB
  Slot 'DIMM 11F ' has 2048 MB
  Slot 'DIMM 12H ' has 2048 MB
  Slot 'Board 3, DIMM 1A' has 2048 MB
  Slot 'Board 3, DIMM 2B' has 2048 MB
  Slot 'Board 3, DIMM 3C' has 2048 MB
  Slot 'Board 3, DIMM 4D' has 2048 MB
  Slot 'DIMM 13B ' has 2048 MB
  Slot 'DIMM 14D ' has 2048 MB
  Slot 'DIMM 15F ' has 2048 MB
  Slot 'DIMM 16H ' has 2048 MB
  Slot 'Board 4, DIMM 1A' has 2048 MB
  Slot 'Board 4, DIMM 2B' has 2048 MB
  Slot 'Board 4, DIMM 3C' has 2048 MB
  Slot 'Board 4, DIMM 4D' has 2048 MB 
Local Drive Volumes 
   
c: (NTFS on drive 1) 73.36 GB 52.03 GB free 
d: (NTFS on drive 2) 73.37 GB 39.55 GB free 
e: (NTFS on drive 3) 440.34 GB 289.08 GB free 
j: (NTFS on drive 0) 513.62 GB 438.36 GB free 
l: (NTFS on drive 4) 733.91 GB 611.72 GB free 
p: ( on drive e:) 440.34 GB 289.08 GB free 
q: ( on drive e:) 440.34 GB 289.08 GB free 
r: (NTFS on drive 5) 1027.47 GB 742.11 GB free 
 

RE: Citrix printing question

[Webster]

I have never used the Java client.  Just remove it from the list of
available clients because it is not "vital to being able to open apps".


Webster

> -Original Message-
> From: Joe Heaton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 10:52 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Citrix printing question
> 
> Ok, so after tracking down the error message on Citrix website, come to
> find out I have no icajava folder at all.  Which, of course, is vital
> to
> being able to open apps through the web client.  It's also not on the
> CD
> I have.  I don't have the Components CD, and the Citrix site is not
> very
> friendly to people with older versions...  Digging continues.
> 
> 
> Joe Heaton
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Joe Heaton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 7:09 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Citrix printing question
> 
> Here's the error from Web Interface:
> 
> ERROR: An error has occurred while trying to launch the application.
> Please contact your administrator. Log ID: c79b0656
> 
> Looking at Event Viewer on the server gives me the following two
> errors:
> 
> 1) The MetaFrame Presentation Server Client for Java files could not be
> located on the server. Please ensure that the client files have been
> copied to the correct location. [Log ID: c79b0656]
> 
> 2) Your MetaFrame farm is not licensed to support workspace control.
> This was reported by the XML Service at address "http://Server:8080";.
> [Log ID: 8017e750]
> 
> The first one seems clear, I guess I need to throw the CD back in and
> install the Java client?  I thought I had installed all client
> versions,
> am I confused here?  Not sure what the second one means, other than I'm
> not licensed to do the Web Interface?  I'm going to go to Citrix site
> and see if I can get some answers, but if you have those answers, I'd
> be
> happy to get them from you too...
> 
> I'm also going to do the policy change now, and let you know how that
> goes.
> 
> 
> Joe Heaton
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Webster [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 6:49 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Citrix printing question
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Joe Heaton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: RE: Citrix printing question
> >
> > Don't recall the exact error, and I'm on the train headed home.  I'll
> > run it in the morning, and let you know.  I'll also try that change,
> > and let you know how it goes.  Really appreciate the help.
> 
> Joe,
> 
> Have you had the time to try the policy change yet or get the Web
> Interface error?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> 
> Webster
> 
> 
> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> ~   ~
> 
> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> ~   ~
> 
> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> ~   ~


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: Citrix printing question

[Joe Heaton]

Ok, so after tracking down the error message on Citrix website, come to
find out I have no icajava folder at all.  Which, of course, is vital to
being able to open apps through the web client.  It's also not on the CD
I have.  I don't have the Components CD, and the Citrix site is not very
friendly to people with older versions...  Digging continues. 


Joe Heaton

-Original Message-
From: Joe Heaton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 7:09 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Citrix printing question

Here's the error from Web Interface:

ERROR: An error has occurred while trying to launch the application.
Please contact your administrator. Log ID: c79b0656

Looking at Event Viewer on the server gives me the following two errors:

1) The MetaFrame Presentation Server Client for Java files could not be
located on the server. Please ensure that the client files have been
copied to the correct location. [Log ID: c79b0656] 

2) Your MetaFrame farm is not licensed to support workspace control.
This was reported by the XML Service at address "http://Server:8080";.
[Log ID: 8017e750]

The first one seems clear, I guess I need to throw the CD back in and
install the Java client?  I thought I had installed all client versions,
am I confused here?  Not sure what the second one means, other than I'm
not licensed to do the Web Interface?  I'm going to go to Citrix site
and see if I can get some answers, but if you have those answers, I'd be
happy to get them from you too...

I'm also going to do the policy change now, and let you know how that
goes.


Joe Heaton

-Original Message-
From: Webster [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 6:49 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Citrix printing question

> -Original Message-
> From: Joe Heaton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Citrix printing question
> 
> Don't recall the exact error, and I'm on the train headed home.  I'll 
> run it in the morning, and let you know.  I'll also try that change, 
> and let you know how it goes.  Really appreciate the help.

Joe,

Have you had the time to try the policy change yet or get the Web
Interface error?

Thanks


Webster


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

R: NTBackup failing on large files

[HELP_PC]

Just 2 other things :updated last firmware for the LTO and disks from HP 
FIRMWARE DISK (8.0)?
 
GuidoElia
HELPPC
 

  _  

Da: David W. McSpadden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Inviato: mercoledì 25 giugno 2008 16.09
A: NT System Admin Issues
Oggetto: Re: NTBackup failing on large files


Tried to a USB got the same.
LTO has own card and own bus on the motherboard.

- Original Message - 
From: HELP_PC   
To: NT System Admin Issues   
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 10:04 AM
Subject: R: NTBackup failing on large files

Try a backup to other media (i.e. disk). Has the LTO a separate card ?
 
GuidoElia
HELPPC
 

  _  

Da: David W. McSpadden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Inviato: mercoledì 25 giugno 2008 15.54
A: NT System Admin Issues
Oggetto: Re: NTBackup failing on large files


Maintenance plan within SQL 2000 Enterprise.

- Original Message - 
From: Webster   
To: NT System Admin   Issues 
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 9:53 AM
Subject: RE: NTBackup failing on large files


 

From: David W. McSpadden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Subject: NTBackup failing on large files

 

I am running Windows Server Enterprise 2003.

I am running SQL Enterprise 2003.

On a 32 bit install.

I run SQL backup everynight.

I have a 60GB backup file for my production database.

I run NTBackup and it backup up all the databases except the Production 
database.

It runs for about 2 hours backing it up and then fails within about 300 Mb of 
finishing stating the file is inconsistant.

Has anyone seen this?

 

When you say "I run SQL backup everynight", do you mean you use a SQL 
maintenance plan to run a backup or you backup the actual database with 
NTBackup?

 

 

Webster








__





This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are property of Indiana Members 
Credit Union, are confidential, and are intended solely for the use of the 
individual or entity to whom this e-mail is addressed. If you are not one of 
the named recipient(s) or otherwise have reason to believe that you have 
received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete this 
message immediately from your computer. Any other use, retention, 
dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this email is strictly 
prohibited.





This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.


For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 


__





















__





This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are property of Indiana Members 
Credit Union, are confidential, and are intended solely for the use of the 
individual or entity to whom this e-mail is addressed. If you are not one of 
the named recipient(s) or otherwise have reason to believe that you have 
received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete this 
message immediately from your computer. Any other use, retention, 
dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this email is strictly 
prohibited.





This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.


For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 


__









~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

New Group Policy Preference Extensions and WSUS.

[Kennedy, Jim]

I see the update for Vista in WSUS, but not XP. Am I missing something or is it 
not available via WSUS? Should be KB943729

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: NTBackup failing on large files

[Joseph L. Casale]

David,
Can you explain in detail your setup as far as hardware is concerned, such as 
HBA, Drive etc?
I just went through *many* months of pain with the same issues.

jlc

From: David W. McSpadden [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 8:34 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: NTBackup failing on large files

Checkdb runs everynight with 0 allocation errors and 0 consistency errors.
- Original Message -
From: Webster
To: NT System Admin Issues
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 10:28 AM
Subject: RE: NTBackup failing on large files

There is a big difference between “seems OK” and “IS OK”.


Webster

From: David W. McSpadden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: NTBackup failing on large files

Everynight.
The database seems ok.  It is just the backup.  SQL finishes the SQL backup 
with no errors or events.
NT runs the NTbackup but the verification shows a file that is inconsistent and 
fails.
Running a restore on the inconsistent file shows that the file gets to about 55 
or 57 Gb and fails.
It is really odd.  I think it might be hardware related but I have no idea how 
to proof it to HP.
- Original Message -
From: Webster
Subject: RE: NTBackup failing on large files

Have you tried a “dbcc checkdb” on the database?

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa258278(SQL.80).aspx


Webster



__



This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are property of Indiana Members 
Credit Union, are confidential, and are intended solely for the use of the 
individual or entity to whom this e-mail is addressed. If you are not one of 
the named recipient(s) or otherwise have reason to believe that you have 
received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete this 
message immediately from your computer. Any other use, retention, 
dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this email is strictly 
prohibited.



This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.

For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email

__










~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: Having to disjoin/rejoin workstations on a consistent basis

[Jacob]

Paper towels or a mop??? ;-)

-Original Message-
From: Joe Heaton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 10:08 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Having to disjoin/rejoin workstations on a consistent basis

May need to get some paper towels to clean up your spilt DNS ;P
(Sorry, I know it's not helpful, but I couldn't help it.) 


Joe Heaton

-Original Message-
From: Jacob [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 9:06 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Having to disjoin/rejoin workstations on a consistent basis

AD integrated
Spilt DNS
Internal DNS on DC (corp.excaliburfilms.com) One Domain Forwarders to
external DNS servers

All the DNS entries look fine to me.

Does this help?
-Original Message-
From: Andy Shook [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 8:15 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Having to disjoin/rejoin workstations on a consistent basis

My first thought is DNS.  Care to explain how DNS is setup at this site?


Shook
-Original Message-
From: Jacob [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 11:13 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Having to disjoin/rejoin workstations on a consistent basis

No.. windows 2003.

-Original Message-
From: Peter van Houten [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 8:05 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: Having to disjoin/rejoin workstations on a consistent basis

Is it on SBS2003?

On the 24/06/2008 16:22, Jacob wrote the following:
> Okay, first I thought it was XP SP3, but now it is not...
> 
> I have having issues with users unable to log into the domain.  I have
to
> disjoin/rejoin the domain on a workstation?
> 
> This happens sporadic around the network at various workstations.
Sometimes
> it will happened to a workstation every day, sometimes every few days.
> Happens throughout the day.  I have made not changes to the domain or
any
> group policies.
> 
> I have been searching Google and MS knowledge base trying a few
suggestions,
> but nothing seems to work.
> 
> This started within the last two weeks.
> 
> Any ideas where to look?  Event Viewer does not help me out.
> 
> Thanks
> Jacob


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: Citrix printing question

[Joe Heaton]

None of our users will be accessing outside the "network", so what I'm
hoping to do is set up site-to-site VPNs between my firewalls, and have
the users connec through that using whichever client ends up being the
best.
 
Joe Heaton
 



From: Tom Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 6:42 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Citrix printing question


We use PNAgent here, too for some users.  Most of our Citrix users use
the Secure Access Gateway appliance and I redirect them to the internal
web page once they make it through that.  
 
I use the Citrix VPN client with the Access Gateway, then connect my
PNAgent to my internal network.  I like that since it does not time out
like the web interface.  
 
Citrix 5.0 is dues out this summer.  It better be good or I'll be going
native Windows 2008 Terminal Services.

>>> "Joe Heaton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 6/24/2008 6:45 PM >>>

Well, I'd like to move to Web Interface, but I was having difficulties
launching the apps from the web page...
 
Joe Heaton
 



From: Webster [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 2:53 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Citrix printing question



ID10T error! J  just kidding.  I do not know.  You are the 1st person I
have seen that uses PNAgent in production.  Let me set it up in my lab
and see if I can duplicate the issue. 

 

 

Webster

 

From: Joe Heaton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 4:47 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Citrix printing question

 

Ok, so I set my printing policy the same as yours.  I applied the policy
to myself.  Logged in through PNAgent, opened the application, ran a
report, printed to the default printer...no problem.

 

Quit out of the application, exited out of PNAgent, changed the default
printer.  Re-logged in, ran the same report, printed to the original
printer, not the new default.

 

Any ideas why it kept the original default, instead of loading the "new"
default?

 

Joe Heaton

 

 



From: Webster [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 1:58 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Citrix printing question

No, but it is the only place you can tell Citrix to not touch the users
default printer setting.

 

 

Webster

 

From: Joe Heaton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 2:58 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Citrix printing question

 

With the session printer setting, do you have a list of print
servers/printers there?

 

Joe Heaton

 

 



From: Webster [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 11:51 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Citrix printing question

From: Joe Heaton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Subject: RE: Citrix printing question

 

Native printer driver auto-install - Disabled.

 

Universal driver - enabled.  (Use universal driver only)

 

 

Applied to security groups containing the users of the remote offices.

 

Here is what I have in my lab and what I use at customer sites:

 

Printing

  Client Printers

  Auto-Creation

  Enabled: AutoCreate the
Client's Default Printer Only

  Legacy client printers

  Enabled: Create dynamic
session-private client printers

  Drivers

  Native printer driver auto-install

  Disabled

  Universal driver

  Enabled: Use universal
driver only

  Session printers

  Enabled:  Do not adjust the user's
default printer

 

HTH

 

 

Webster

 

 
 
 

 

 

 

 
 
 

 

 






Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including attachments, is
for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain
confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use,
disclosure, or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended
recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all
copies of the original message. 




~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: Having to disjoin/rejoin workstations on a consistent basis

[Jacob]

No 5722.  There was an 5723 yesterday and I fixed that.

Same thing happened again this morning.  All the times are within one or two
seconds.

-Original Message-
From: Cameron [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 9:35 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Having to disjoin/rejoin workstations on a consistent basis

Do you seen any Netlogon errors on your DC's? Specifically 5722


-Original Message-
From: Jacob [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 12:18 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Having to disjoin/rejoin workstations on a consistent basis

Hmmm... the time on the second DC was off by 7 minutes.

Everything is sync'd now.. DCs and workstations.

Let's see what happens.

-Original Message-
From: Cameron [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 8:36 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Having to disjoin/rejoin workstations on a consistent basis

I had this same issue a while back and it turns out it was a replication
issue. Once that was sorted, the problem machines bounced out of the domain
and rejoined everything was fine after that. I don't specifically remember
why they were having the issue, but I *think* it was something to do with an
internal password and time thing being out of sync between the multiple
DC's.

HTH
Cameron


-Original Message-
From: Jacob [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 10:22 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Having to disjoin/rejoin workstations on a consistent basis

Okay, first I thought it was XP SP3, but now it is not...

I have having issues with users unable to log into the domain.  I have to
disjoin/rejoin the domain on a workstation?

This happens sporadic around the network at various workstations.  Sometimes
it will happened to a workstation every day, sometimes every few days.
Happens throughout the day.  I have made not changes to the domain or any
group policies.

I have been searching Google and MS knowledge base trying a few suggestions,
but nothing seems to work.

This started within the last two weeks.

Any ideas where to look?  Event Viewer does not help me out.

Thanks
Jacob


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Re: NTBackup failing on large files

[David W. McSpadden]

Checkdb runs everynight with 0 allocation errors and 0 consistency errors.
  - Original Message - 
  From: Webster 
  To: NT System Admin Issues 
  Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 10:28 AM
  Subject: RE: NTBackup failing on large files


  There is a big difference between "seems OK" and "IS OK".

   

   

  Webster

   

  From: David W. McSpadden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  Subject: Re: NTBackup failing on large files

   

  Everynight.

  The database seems ok.  It is just the backup.  SQL finishes the SQL backup 
with no errors or events.

  NT runs the NTbackup but the verification shows a file that is inconsistent 
and fails.

  Running a restore on the inconsistent file shows that the file gets to about 
55 or 57 Gb and fails.

  It is really odd.  I think it might be hardware related but I have no idea 
how to proof it to HP.

- Original Message - 

From: Webster 

Subject: RE: NTBackup failing on large files

 

Have you tried a "dbcc checkdb" on the database?

 

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa258278(SQL.80).aspx

 

 

Webster







__

This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are property of Indiana Members 
Credit Union, are confidential, and are intended solely for the use of the 
individual or entity to whom this e-mail is addressed. If you are not one of 
the named recipient(s) or otherwise have reason to believe that you have 
received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete this 
message immediately from your computer. Any other use, retention, 
dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this email is strictly 
prohibited.

This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 
__




~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: NTBackup failing on large files

[Webster]

There is a big difference between "seems OK" and "IS OK".

 

 

Webster

 

From: David W. McSpadden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Subject: Re: NTBackup failing on large files

 

Everynight.

The database seems ok.  It is just the backup.  SQL finishes the SQL backup
with no errors or events.

NT runs the NTbackup but the verification shows a file that is inconsistent
and fails.

Running a restore on the inconsistent file shows that the file gets to about
55 or 57 Gb and fails.

It is really odd.  I think it might be hardware related but I have no idea
how to proof it to HP.

- Original Message - 

From: Webster   

Subject: RE: NTBackup failing on large files

 

Have you tried a "dbcc checkdb" on the database?

 

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa258278(SQL.80).aspx

 

 

Webster


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Re: NTBackup failing on large files

[David W. McSpadden]

Everynight.
The database seems ok.  It is just the backup.  SQL finishes the SQL backup 
with no errors or events.
NT runs the NTbackup but the verification shows a file that is inconsistent and 
fails.
Running a restore on the inconsistent file shows that the file gets to about 55 
or 57 Gb and fails.
It is really odd.  I think it might be hardware related but I have no idea how 
to proof it to HP.
  - Original Message - 
  From: Webster 
  To: NT System Admin Issues 
  Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 10:19 AM
  Subject: RE: NTBackup failing on large files


  Have you tried a "dbcc checkdb" on the database?

   

  http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa258278(SQL.80).aspx

   

   

  Webster

   

  From: David W. McSpadden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 9:09 AM
  To: NT System Admin Issues
  Subject: Re: NTBackup failing on large files

   

  Tried to a USB got the same.

  LTO has own card and own bus on the motherboard.

- Original Message - 

From: HELP_PC 

To: NT System Admin Issues 

Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 10:04 AM

Subject: R: NTBackup failing on large files

 

Try a backup to other media (i.e. disk). Has the LTO a separate card ?

 

GuidoElia

HELPPC

 

 




Da: David W. McSpadden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Inviato: mercoledì 25 giugno 2008 15.54
A: NT System Admin Issues
Oggetto: Re: NTBackup failing on large files

Maintenance plan within SQL 2000 Enterprise.

  - Original Message - 

  From: Webster 

  To: NT System Admin Issues 

  Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 9:53 AM

  Subject: RE: NTBackup failing on large files

   

   

  From: David W. McSpadden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  Subject: NTBackup failing on large files

   

  I am running Windows Server Enterprise 2003.

  I am running SQL Enterprise 2003.

  On a 32 bit install.

  I run SQL backup everynight.

  I have a 60GB backup file for my production database.

  I run NTBackup and it backup up all the databases except the Production 
database.

  It runs for about 2 hours backing it up and then fails within about 300 
Mb of finishing stating the file is inconsistant.

  Has anyone seen this?

   

  When you say "I run SQL backup everynight", do you mean you use a SQL 
maintenance plan to run a backup or you backup the actual database with 
NTBackup?

   

   

  Webster

   



__



This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are property of Indiana Members 
Credit Union, are confidential, and are intended solely for the use of the 
individual or entity to whom this e-mail is addressed. If you are not one of 
the named recipient(s) or otherwise have reason to believe that you have 
received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete this 
message immediately from your computer. Any other use, retention, 
dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this email is strictly 
prohibited.



This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.

For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 

__



 

 

__



This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are property of Indiana Members 
Credit Union, are confidential, and are intended solely for the use of the 
individual or entity to whom this e-mail is addressed. If you are not one of 
the named recipient(s) or otherwise have reason to believe that you have 
received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete this 
message immediately from your computer. Any other use, retention, 
dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this email is strictly 
prohibited.



This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.

For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 

__

  

 





__

This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are property of Indiana Members 
Credit Union, are confidential, and are intended solely for the use of the 
individual or entity to whom this e-mail is addressed. If you are not one of 
the named recipient(s) or otherwise have reason to believe that you have 
received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete this 
message immediately from your computer. Any other use, retention, 
dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this email is strictly 
prohibited.

This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 
__

RE: A desktop backup solution that works.

[Groups]

Thank you all for your input.

I'm trying out Acronis and we'll see how it goes.

The only thing I noticed missing from it is backup file rotation, so I setup
a full backup for Friday and 1 incremental for each weekday.

 

 
Dave

===
Beach Computers
Affordable Hosting Solutions
http://www.beachcomp.com
===
Cheap Domain Warehouse
Get Your Own Dot!
http://www.cheapdomainwarehouse.com
 


Disclaimer and confidentiality note:

The contents of this communication are intended/meant only for addressee(s)
and may contain information that is privileged or otherwise confidential.
If you are not the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any
disclosure, copying, distribution or taking any action in reliance on the
contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.
The contents of this e-mail shall not be forwarded to any third party. If
you have received this electronic mail transmission in error, please delete
it from your system without copying or forwarding it, and notify the sender
of the error by reply email, so that the sender's address records
can be corrected.
Views and opinions are solely those of the sender unless clearly indicated
as being that of Beach Computers or any of it's affiliated companies.
Beach Computers cannot assure that the integrity of this communication has
been maintained or that it is free of errors, virus, interception or
interference.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

_
This e-mail, including attachments, contains information that is
confidential and may be protected by attorney/client or other privileges.
This e-mail, including attachments, constitutes non-public information
intended to be conveyed only to the designated recipient(s). If you are not
an intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any unauthorized use,
dissemination, distribution or reproduction of this e-mail, including
attachments, is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have
received this e-mail in error, please notify me by e-mail reply and delete
the original message and any attachments from your system.
_

 

 

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: NTBackup failing on large files

[Webster]

Have you tried a “dbcc checkdb” on the database?

 

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa258278(SQL.80).aspx

 

 

Webster

 

From: David W. McSpadden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 9:09 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: NTBackup failing on large files

 

Tried to a USB got the same.

LTO has own card and own bus on the motherboard.

- Original Message - 

From: HELP_PC   

To: NT System Admin Issues   

Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 10:04 AM

Subject: R: NTBackup failing on large files

 

Try a backup to other media (i.e. disk). Has the LTO a separate card ?

 

GuidoElia

HELPPC

 

 


  _  


Da: David W. McSpadden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Inviato: mercoledì 25 giugno 2008 15.54
A: NT System Admin Issues
Oggetto: Re: NTBackup failing on large files

Maintenance plan within SQL 2000 Enterprise.

- Original Message - 

From: Webster   

To: NT System Admin Issues   

Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 9:53 AM

Subject: RE: NTBackup failing on large files

 

 

From: David W. McSpadden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Subject: NTBackup failing on large files

 

I am running Windows Server Enterprise 2003.

I am running SQL Enterprise 2003.

On a 32 bit install.

I run SQL backup everynight.

I have a 60GB backup file for my production database.

I run NTBackup and it backup up all the databases except the Production
database.

It runs for about 2 hours backing it up and then fails within about 300 Mb
of finishing stating the file is inconsistant.

Has anyone seen this?

 

When you say “I run SQL backup everynight”, do you mean you use a SQL
maintenance plan to run a backup or you backup the actual database with
NTBackup?

 

 

Webster

 








__













This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are property of Indiana
Members Credit Union, are confidential, and are intended solely for the use
of the individual or entity to whom this e-mail is addressed. If you are not
one of the named recipient(s) or otherwise have reason to believe that you
have received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete
this message immediately from your computer. Any other use, retention,
dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this email is strictly
prohibited.













This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.






For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 






__






 
 
 

 

 

 







__













This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are property of Indiana
Members Credit Union, are confidential, and are intended solely for the use
of the individual or entity to whom this e-mail is addressed. If you are not
one of the named recipient(s) or otherwise have reason to believe that you
have received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete
this message immediately from your computer. Any other use, retention,
dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this email is strictly
prohibited.













This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.






For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 






__






 

 

 

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: Citrix printing question

[Joe Heaton]

Well, the policy change doesn't seem to be working properly, still.  I
made the change, logged in, opened the app, printed a report, went to
the default printer fine.  Exited completely out of Citrix all the way
back to the desktop, changed the default printer, got back in, printed
to the "new" default fine.  Did the same thing, changed default back to
original, and the report still prints to the second printer. 


Joe Heaton

-Original Message-
From: Webster [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 6:49 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Citrix printing question

> -Original Message-
> From: Joe Heaton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Citrix printing question
> 
> Don't recall the exact error, and I'm on the train headed home.  I'll 
> run it in the morning, and let you know.  I'll also try that change, 
> and let you know how it goes.  Really appreciate the help.

Joe,

Have you had the time to try the policy change yet or get the Web
Interface error?

Thanks


Webster


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: Page file of Exchange 2003, 1.05 times the RAM or 1.5 times?

[Jacob]

Something tells me that must be a typo...  My opinion.


-Original Message-
From: Ajay Kulsh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 7:39 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Page file of Exchange 2003, 1.05 times the RAM or 1.5 times?

In most place, we read that the pagefile of a Windows server should be at
least 1.5 X RAM. However, latest version of ExBPA tool gives error in such a
case and tell us to make pagefile only 1.05 X RAM.

Should we reduce the file size on Exchange server to only 1.05 X RAM?
Thanks.

Jay Kulsh
So. Pasadena, CA



~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Re: NTBackup failing on large files

[David W. McSpadden]

Tried to a USB got the same.
LTO has own card and own bus on the motherboard.
  - Original Message - 
  From: HELP_PC 
  To: NT System Admin Issues 
  Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 10:04 AM
  Subject: R: NTBackup failing on large files


  Try a backup to other media (i.e. disk). Has the LTO a separate card ?

  GuidoElia
  HELPPC




--
  Da: David W. McSpadden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  Inviato: mercoledì 25 giugno 2008 15.54
  A: NT System Admin Issues
  Oggetto: Re: NTBackup failing on large files


  Maintenance plan within SQL 2000 Enterprise.
- Original Message - 
From: Webster 
To: NT System Admin Issues 
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 9:53 AM
Subject: RE: NTBackup failing on large files


 

From: David W. McSpadden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Subject: NTBackup failing on large files

 

I am running Windows Server Enterprise 2003.

I am running SQL Enterprise 2003.

On a 32 bit install.

I run SQL backup everynight.

I have a 60GB backup file for my production database.

I run NTBackup and it backup up all the databases except the Production 
database.

It runs for about 2 hours backing it up and then fails within about 300 Mb 
of finishing stating the file is inconsistant.

Has anyone seen this?

 

When you say "I run SQL backup everynight", do you mean you use a SQL 
maintenance plan to run a backup or you backup the actual database with 
NTBackup?

 

 

Webster






__

This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are property of Indiana Members 
Credit Union, are confidential, and are intended solely for the use of the 
individual or entity to whom this e-mail is addressed. If you are not one of 
the named recipient(s) or otherwise have reason to believe that you have 
received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete this 
message immediately from your computer. Any other use, retention, 
dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this email is strictly 
prohibited.

This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 
__













__

This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are property of Indiana Members 
Credit Union, are confidential, and are intended solely for the use of the 
individual or entity to whom this e-mail is addressed. If you are not one of 
the named recipient(s) or otherwise have reason to believe that you have 
received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete this 
message immediately from your computer. Any other use, retention, 
dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this email is strictly 
prohibited.

This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 
__


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: Citrix printing question

[Joe Heaton]

Here's the error from Web Interface:

ERROR: An error has occurred while trying to launch the application.
Please contact your administrator. Log ID: c79b0656

Looking at Event Viewer on the server gives me the following two errors:

1) The MetaFrame Presentation Server Client for Java files could not be
located on the server. Please ensure that the client files have been
copied to the correct location. [Log ID: c79b0656] 

2) Your MetaFrame farm is not licensed to support workspace control.
This was reported by the XML Service at address "http://Server:8080";.
[Log ID: 8017e750]

The first one seems clear, I guess I need to throw the CD back in and
install the Java client?  I thought I had installed all client versions,
am I confused here?  Not sure what the second one means, other than I'm
not licensed to do the Web Interface?  I'm going to go to Citrix site
and see if I can get some answers, but if you have those answers, I'd be
happy to get them from you too...

I'm also going to do the policy change now, and let you know how that
goes.


Joe Heaton

-Original Message-
From: Webster [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 6:49 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: Citrix printing question

> -Original Message-
> From: Joe Heaton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Citrix printing question
> 
> Don't recall the exact error, and I'm on the train headed home.  I'll 
> run it in the morning, and let you know.  I'll also try that change, 
> and let you know how it goes.  Really appreciate the help.

Joe,

Have you had the time to try the policy change yet or get the Web
Interface error?

Thanks


Webster


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Re: NTBackup failing on large files

[David W. McSpadden]

Nope.
I've been told that's bad for .mdf and .ldf files.

  - Original Message - 
  From: Webster 
  To: NT System Admin Issues 
  Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 10:00 AM
  Subject: RE: NTBackup failing on large files


  Do you have compression enabled on the drive you are backing up to?

   

   

  Webster

   

  From: David W. McSpadden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  Subject: Re: NTBackup failing on large files

   

  Maintenance plan within SQL 2000 Enterprise.

- Original Message - 

From: Webster 

Subject: RE: NTBackup failing on large files

 

 

From: David W. McSpadden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Subject: NTBackup failing on large files

 

I am running Windows Server Enterprise 2003.

I am running SQL Enterprise 2003.

On a 32 bit install.

I run SQL backup everynight.

I have a 60GB backup file for my production database.

I run NTBackup and it backup up all the databases except the Production 
database.

It runs for about 2 hours backing it up and then fails within about 300 Mb 
of finishing stating the file is inconsistant.

Has anyone seen this?

 

When you say "I run SQL backup everynight", do you mean you use a SQL 
maintenance plan to run a backup or you backup the actual database with 
NTBackup?







__

This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are property of Indiana Members 
Credit Union, are confidential, and are intended solely for the use of the 
individual or entity to whom this e-mail is addressed. If you are not one of 
the named recipient(s) or otherwise have reason to believe that you have 
received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete this 
message immediately from your computer. Any other use, retention, 
dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this email is strictly 
prohibited.

This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 
__




~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

R: NTBackup failing on large files

[HELP_PC]

Try a backup to other media (i.e. disk). Has the LTO a separate card ?
 
GuidoElia
HELPPC
 

  _  

Da: David W. McSpadden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Inviato: mercoledì 25 giugno 2008 15.54
A: NT System Admin Issues
Oggetto: Re: NTBackup failing on large files


Maintenance plan within SQL 2000 Enterprise.

- Original Message - 
From: Webster   
To: NT System Admin Issues   
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 9:53 AM
Subject: RE: NTBackup failing on large files


 

From: David W. McSpadden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Subject: NTBackup failing on large files

 

I am running Windows Server Enterprise 2003.

I am running SQL Enterprise 2003.

On a 32 bit install.

I run SQL backup everynight.

I have a 60GB backup file for my production database.

I run NTBackup and it backup up all the databases except the Production 
database.

It runs for about 2 hours backing it up and then fails within about 300 Mb of 
finishing stating the file is inconsistant.

Has anyone seen this?

 

When you say "I run SQL backup everynight", do you mean you use a SQL 
maintenance plan to run a backup or you backup the actual database with 
NTBackup?

 

 

Webster








__





This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are property of Indiana Members 
Credit Union, are confidential, and are intended solely for the use of the 
individual or entity to whom this e-mail is addressed. If you are not one of 
the named recipient(s) or otherwise have reason to believe that you have 
received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete this 
message immediately from your computer. Any other use, retention, 
dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this email is strictly 
prohibited.





This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.


For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 


__













~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: NTBackup failing on large files

[Webster]

Do you have compression enabled on the drive you are backing up to?

 

 

Webster

 

From: David W. McSpadden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Subject: Re: NTBackup failing on large files

 

Maintenance plan within SQL 2000 Enterprise.

- Original Message - 

From: Webster   

Subject: RE: NTBackup failing on large files

 

 

From: David W. McSpadden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Subject: NTBackup failing on large files

 

I am running Windows Server Enterprise 2003.

I am running SQL Enterprise 2003.

On a 32 bit install.

I run SQL backup everynight.

I have a 60GB backup file for my production database.

I run NTBackup and it backup up all the databases except the Production
database.

It runs for about 2 hours backing it up and then fails within about 300 Mb
of finishing stating the file is inconsistant.

Has anyone seen this?

 

When you say "I run SQL backup everynight", do you mean you use a SQL
maintenance plan to run a backup or you backup the actual database with
NTBackup?


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Re: NTBackup failing on large files

[David W. McSpadden]

Maintenance plan within SQL 2000 Enterprise.
  - Original Message - 
  From: Webster 
  To: NT System Admin Issues 
  Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 9:53 AM
  Subject: RE: NTBackup failing on large files


   

  From: David W. McSpadden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  Subject: NTBackup failing on large files

   

  I am running Windows Server Enterprise 2003.

  I am running SQL Enterprise 2003.

  On a 32 bit install.

  I run SQL backup everynight.

  I have a 60GB backup file for my production database.

  I run NTBackup and it backup up all the databases except the Production 
database.

  It runs for about 2 hours backing it up and then fails within about 300 Mb of 
finishing stating the file is inconsistant.

  Has anyone seen this?

   

  When you say "I run SQL backup everynight", do you mean you use a SQL 
maintenance plan to run a backup or you backup the actual database with 
NTBackup?

   

   

  Webster







__

This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are property of Indiana Members 
Credit Union, are confidential, and are intended solely for the use of the 
individual or entity to whom this e-mail is addressed. If you are not one of 
the named recipient(s) or otherwise have reason to believe that you have 
received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete this 
message immediately from your computer. Any other use, retention, 
dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this email is strictly 
prohibited.

This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 
__




~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: NTBackup failing on large files

[Webster]

 

From: David W. McSpadden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Subject: NTBackup failing on large files

 

I am running Windows Server Enterprise 2003.

I am running SQL Enterprise 2003.

On a 32 bit install.

I run SQL backup everynight.

I have a 60GB backup file for my production database.

I run NTBackup and it backup up all the databases except the Production
database.

It runs for about 2 hours backing it up and then fails within about 300 Mb
of finishing stating the file is inconsistant.

Has anyone seen this?

 

When you say "I run SQL backup everynight", do you mean you use a SQL
maintenance plan to run a backup or you backup the actual database with
NTBackup?

 

 

Webster


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: BES on VM?

[Michael . Leone]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 06/25/2008 09:46:24 AM:

> Intersting!  Our main NYC HQ has most of their Domino servers 
virtualized. 
>  Hopefully, the Domino's will not live up (down) to their name...

As I say, I'm just passing along what I heard. I think if you have enough 
RAM, etc in your VM environment, it should work ...

I'm also told Domino is happier in a cluster. We don't cluster Domino here 
(altho we cluster SQL a lot).

Food for thought. Much carefully, now ... :-)

> --
> Richard McClary, Systems Administrator
> ASPCA Knowledge Management
> 1717 S Philo Rd, Ste 36, Urbana, IL  61802
> 217-337-9761
> http://www.aspca.org
> 
> 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 06/25/2008 08:43:05 AM:
> 
> > 
> > "Barsodi.John" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 06/24/2008 06:35:00 PM:
> > 
> > > x 2.  BES actually hums along very nicely VM'd. 
> > 
> > It's not the BES so much ( I used to run BES in VMware in an 
> > Exchange environment), so much as the Domino processes to support 
> > Notes, that are the problem. Or so our consultants who are planning 
> > our VMware project tell us, and they say they were told that by 
> > VMware engineers. 
> > 
> > > 
> > > - John Barsodi
> > > 
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Troy Meyer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> > > Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 3:02 PM
> > > To: NT System Admin Issues
> > > Subject: RE: BES on VM?
> > > 
> > > Abso-freaking-lutely
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 2:56 PM
> > > To: NT System Admin Issues
> > > Subject: BES on VM?
> > > 
> > > Sorry if this is too simple, but we have a BES server in a Lotus 
Notes
> > > shop...
> > > 
> > > Can the BES be moved and work well on a VMWare virtual server?
> > > 
> > > Thanks...
> > > --
> > > Richard McClary, Systems Administrator
> > > ASPCA Knowledge Management
> > > 1717 S Philo Rd, Ste 36, Urbana, IL  61802
> > > 217-337-9761
> > > http://www.aspca.org
> > > 
> > > 
> > > ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> > > ~   ~
> > > 
> > > ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> > > ~   ~
> > > 
> > > ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> > > ~   ~
> 
> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> ~   ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: Citrix printing question

[Webster]

> -Original Message-
> From: Joe Heaton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Citrix printing question
> 
> Don't recall the exact error, and I'm on the train headed home.  I'll
> run it in the morning, and let you know.  I'll also try that change,
> and let you know how it goes.  Really appreciate the help.

Joe,

Have you had the time to try the policy change yet or get the Web Interface 
error?

Thanks


Webster


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: BES on VM?

[Andy Shook]

Bo. Hiss! That was almost as bad at Webster-humor... :) 

Shook
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 9:46 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: BES on VM?

Intersting!  Our main NYC HQ has most of their Domino servers
virtualized. 
 Hopefully, the Domino's will not live up (down) to their name...
--
Richard McClary, Systems Administrator
ASPCA Knowledge Management
1717 S Philo Rd, Ste 36, Urbana, IL  61802
217-337-9761
http://www.aspca.org


[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 06/25/2008 08:43:05 AM:

> 
> "Barsodi.John" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 06/24/2008 06:35:00 PM:
> 
> > x 2.  BES actually hums along very nicely VM'd. 
> 
> It's not the BES so much ( I used to run BES in VMware in an 
> Exchange environment), so much as the Domino processes to support 
> Notes, that are the problem. Or so our consultants who are planning 
> our VMware project tell us, and they say they were told that by 
> VMware engineers. 
> 
> > 
> > - John Barsodi
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Troy Meyer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> > Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 3:02 PM
> > To: NT System Admin Issues
> > Subject: RE: BES on VM?
> > 
> > Abso-freaking-lutely
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 2:56 PM
> > To: NT System Admin Issues
> > Subject: BES on VM?
> > 
> > Sorry if this is too simple, but we have a BES server in a Lotus
Notes
> > shop...
> > 
> > Can the BES be moved and work well on a VMWare virtual server?
> > 
> > Thanks...
> > --
> > Richard McClary, Systems Administrator
> > ASPCA Knowledge Management
> > 1717 S Philo Rd, Ste 36, Urbana, IL  61802
> > 217-337-9761
> > http://www.aspca.org
> > 
> > 
> > ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> > ~   ~
> > 
> > ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> > ~   ~
> > 
> > ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> > ~   ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: BES on VM?

[RichardMcClary]

Intersting!  Our main NYC HQ has most of their Domino servers virtualized. 
 Hopefully, the Domino's will not live up (down) to their name...
--
Richard McClary, Systems Administrator
ASPCA Knowledge Management
1717 S Philo Rd, Ste 36, Urbana, IL  61802
217-337-9761
http://www.aspca.org


[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 06/25/2008 08:43:05 AM:

> 
> "Barsodi.John" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 06/24/2008 06:35:00 PM:
> 
> > x 2.  BES actually hums along very nicely VM'd. 
> 
> It's not the BES so much ( I used to run BES in VMware in an 
> Exchange environment), so much as the Domino processes to support 
> Notes, that are the problem. Or so our consultants who are planning 
> our VMware project tell us, and they say they were told that by 
> VMware engineers. 
> 
> > 
> > - John Barsodi
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Troy Meyer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> > Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 3:02 PM
> > To: NT System Admin Issues
> > Subject: RE: BES on VM?
> > 
> > Abso-freaking-lutely
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 2:56 PM
> > To: NT System Admin Issues
> > Subject: BES on VM?
> > 
> > Sorry if this is too simple, but we have a BES server in a Lotus Notes
> > shop...
> > 
> > Can the BES be moved and work well on a VMWare virtual server?
> > 
> > Thanks...
> > --
> > Richard McClary, Systems Administrator
> > ASPCA Knowledge Management
> > 1717 S Philo Rd, Ste 36, Urbana, IL  61802
> > 217-337-9761
> > http://www.aspca.org
> > 
> > 
> > ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> > ~   ~
> > 
> > ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> > ~   ~
> > 
> > ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> > ~   ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: BES on VM?

[Michael . Leone]

"Barsodi.John" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 06/24/2008 06:35:00 PM:

> x 2.  BES actually hums along very nicely VM'd.

It's not the BES so much ( I used to run BES in VMware in an Exchange 
environment), so much as the Domino processes to support Notes, that are 
the problem. Or so our consultants who are planning our VMware project 
tell us, and they say they were told that by VMware engineers.

> 
> - John Barsodi
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Troy Meyer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 3:02 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: BES on VM?
> 
> Abso-freaking-lutely
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 2:56 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: BES on VM?
> 
> Sorry if this is too simple, but we have a BES server in a Lotus Notes
> shop...
> 
> Can the BES be moved and work well on a VMWare virtual server?
> 
> Thanks...
> --
> Richard McClary, Systems Administrator
> ASPCA Knowledge Management
> 1717 S Philo Rd, Ste 36, Urbana, IL  61802
> 217-337-9761
> http://www.aspca.org
> 
> 
> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> ~   ~
> 
> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> ~   ~
> 
> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> ~   ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Re: BES on VM?

[Michael . Leone]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 06/24/2008 05:56:20 PM:

> Sorry if this is too simple, but we have a BES server in a Lotus Notes 
> shop...

My symapthies. We run Notes here, with BES.

> Can the BES be moved and work well on a VMWare virtual server?

I'm told not. I hear the VM engineers won't even touch Domino. That was 
enough for us to drop our plans to do it.

Having said that ... yes, it will physically work. When we were testing 
upgrading our BES server from v2 to v4, we tested it in a VMware 
environment. And it does work. If you're a small enough shop, it might 
work without issue.


-- 
Michael Leone
Network Administrator, ISM
Philadelphia Housing Authority
2500 Jackson St
Philadelphia, PA 19145
Tel:  215-684-4180
Cell: 215-252-0143


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: ghost and drivers

[Andy Ognenoff]

>Wasn't Peter Norton and his company the ones who created Ghost?

>From their site:

"Binary Research International (BRI) is a provider of Software Support
Services and solutions. Our Head Office is in Glendale, Wisconsin, USA and
we have a branch located in Canterbury, England. Incorporated in September
1997, BRI was a wholly-owned subsidiary of Binary Research Ltd. of Auckland,
New Zealand - the company that developed the world's first software Cloning
utility, GhostT."

http://binaryresearch.net/about_bri

Wikipedia says it too...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norton_Ghost

 - Andy O.


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: VMWare / Virtualization

[Fogarty, Richard R Mr CTR USA USASOC]

Exactly what we were thinking here too.  

-Original Message-
From: Greg Mulholland [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 10:03 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: VMWare / Virtualization

I'd agree with most here

There may be some special cases that do not warrant virtualisation as people
have mentioned, fortunately our network has a limited amount of them.

We have successfully virtualised multiples of Exchange 2k7, SQL, all dc's,
and a host of other stuff. 40 or so in total.

Our hosts are 2x quad cores with 16gb ram at present. There has been no need
to upgrade memory at this point but we keep a fair bit of head room for host
failover.

I love the DR scenarios it allows me with consummate ease and also the
provisioning of new servers takes bugger all time now. Unfortunately we are
limited to our real failover without vmotion as yet but you cant win them
all.

Greg

From: Fogarty, Richard R Mr CTR USA USASOC [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, 25 June 2008 10:12 AM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: VMWare / Virtualization

Excellent points.  I had forgotten about our RAS box and I didn't know about
the Oracle issue - I'll have to dig into that one.  E2k7 - that shouldn't be
an issue as we have an Enterprise agreement and moving it to a physical box
for support shouldn't be an issue.

-Original Message-
From: Phil Brutsche [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 5:02 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: VMWare / Virtualization

Anything that requires specialized ISA/PCI/PCI-X/PCI-E hardware - fax
cards, crypto cards, etc - absolutely cannot be virtualized.

Anything that's timing sensitive - VoIP, software that needs to
communicate over serial or parallel - might or might not work. VoIP in
particular is discouraged for production but is passable for testing
purposes.

Anything else is fair game, but be aware that not all applications are
supported in a virtualized environment. E2k7 is one of them (but I'm
sure Hyper-V will be officially supported - gee, imagine that), Oracle
is another. That's not to say it won't work, it's just that if:
a) they find out it's virtualized
b) trace a problem you're having to the fact that it's virtualized
the support people will say "we can't help you".

Fogarty Richard MR - CONTR - Team EITC wrote:
> When virtualizing a datacenter is there a stand fast rule on what one
> can/cannot virtualize?

--

Phil Brutsche
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: VMWare / Virtualization

[Fogarty, Richard R Mr CTR USA USASOC]

Makes total sense.  

-Original Message-
From: Joseph L. Casale [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 9:36 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: VMWare / Virtualization

It seems that once MS made the statement cautioning about USN rollback, a
lot of people just assumed virtualizing AD wasn't possible instead of
understanding the simple warning and the trivial admin concepts behind
making it work.

**Don't rollback a dc** Simple. If one breaks, work with it like it was
physical, not virtual.
OTOH, if you understand the concept, it works *very* well in a lab:)

I actually currently don't even look after any AD sites that aren't
virtualized...

jlc

-Original Message-
From: Ken Schaefer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 7:20 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: VMWare / Virtualization

I'm not aware of any FSMO role issues.

Microsoft has a whitepaper on virtualising Active Directory, including
issues with USN Rollback when restoring from snapshots. See:
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=64db845d-f7a3-4209-
8ed2-e261a117fc6b&displaylang=en

Cheers
Ken

> -Original Message-
> From: Fogarty, Richard R Mr CTR USA USASOC
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, 25 June 2008 10:18 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: VMWare / Virtualization
>
> I've heard about the FSMO role issue as well, just don't understand it.
> Simply having those roles (to me) doesn't compute the necessity of a
> physical box.  Wish I understood the reasoning a bit better.
>
> I too love the DR portion of it.  It's one of the main reasons we're
pushing
> hard for this to come faster.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 5:06 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: VMWare / Virtualization
>
> Lots of varied opinions on this subject...
>
> I (personally) will virtualize almost anything (SQL, Exchange, File/Print,
> etc.).  The only things I shy away from virtualizing are the FMSO role DC,
> Oracle (because of their cpu pricing model), or other servers that are
very
> cpu intense.  Aside from that, I'm willing to virtualize most any box.  I
> really like the added DR it provides me (we backup data/files on each
> server via Backup Exec (VM or physical) but in addition, we also backup
the
> entire VM flat-file every night (basically an image backup of the server).
> Restoring the entire VM flat-file can be done in 20 minutes flat, whereas
> rebuilding a crashed server and restoring the data can take hours or more.
>
> Low overhead boxes are typically the best candidate to virtualize (IMO)
but
> if you have a very robust virtual host, you can get away with virtualizing
> database servers, etc. as well.
>
> JR
>
> Original Message:
> -
> From: Fogarty Richard MR - CONTR - Team EITC [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2008 16:47:32 -0400
> To: ntsysadmin@lyris.sunbelt-software.com
> Subject: VMWare / Virtualization
>
>
> When virtualizing a datacenter is there a stand fast rule on what one
> can/cannot virtualize?  For example, we're not scheduled to upgrade to
> E2k7 for some time, so I'd like to virtualize our E2k3 boxes.  We've
> used the capacity planner and very little of our existing infrastructure
> is being taxed.  Our SQL boxes run with all of our DBs on a SAN with
> fiber channel (as do all of our Exchange stores) - so I'm assuming that
> most should be fine.
>
>
>
> I know I've heard some of you say that you'd never virtualize
> everything, so are DCs the only systems you'd leave on a physical box?
> (Mind you, this is outside the obvious systems where you'd get no ROI)
>
>
> Comments?
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Rick
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> ~   ~
>
> 
> myhosting.com - Premium MicrosoftR WindowsR and Linux web and application
> hosting - http://link.myhosting.com/myhosting
>
>
>
> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> ~   ~
>
>
> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> ~   ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: VMWare / Virtualization

[Fogarty, Richard R Mr CTR USA USASOC]

Excellent find... Appreciate it.

-Original Message-
From: Ken Schaefer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 9:20 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: RE: VMWare / Virtualization

I'm not aware of any FSMO role issues.

Microsoft has a whitepaper on virtualising Active Directory, including
issues with USN Rollback when restoring from snapshots. See:
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=64db845d-f7a3-4209-
8ed2-e261a117fc6b&displaylang=en

Cheers
Ken

> -Original Message-
> From: Fogarty, Richard R Mr CTR USA USASOC
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, 25 June 2008 10:18 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: VMWare / Virtualization
>
> I've heard about the FSMO role issue as well, just don't understand it.
> Simply having those roles (to me) doesn't compute the necessity of a
> physical box.  Wish I understood the reasoning a bit better.
>
> I too love the DR portion of it.  It's one of the main reasons we're
pushing
> hard for this to come faster.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 5:06 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: VMWare / Virtualization
>
> Lots of varied opinions on this subject...
>
> I (personally) will virtualize almost anything (SQL, Exchange, File/Print,
> etc.).  The only things I shy away from virtualizing are the FMSO role DC,
> Oracle (because of their cpu pricing model), or other servers that are
very
> cpu intense.  Aside from that, I'm willing to virtualize most any box.  I
> really like the added DR it provides me (we backup data/files on each
> server via Backup Exec (VM or physical) but in addition, we also backup
the
> entire VM flat-file every night (basically an image backup of the server).
> Restoring the entire VM flat-file can be done in 20 minutes flat, whereas
> rebuilding a crashed server and restoring the data can take hours or more.
>
> Low overhead boxes are typically the best candidate to virtualize (IMO)
but
> if you have a very robust virtual host, you can get away with virtualizing
> database servers, etc. as well.
>
> JR
>
> Original Message:
> -
> From: Fogarty Richard MR - CONTR - Team EITC [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2008 16:47:32 -0400
> To: ntsysadmin@lyris.sunbelt-software.com
> Subject: VMWare / Virtualization
>
>
> When virtualizing a datacenter is there a stand fast rule on what one
> can/cannot virtualize?  For example, we're not scheduled to upgrade to
> E2k7 for some time, so I'd like to virtualize our E2k3 boxes.  We've
> used the capacity planner and very little of our existing infrastructure
> is being taxed.  Our SQL boxes run with all of our DBs on a SAN with
> fiber channel (as do all of our Exchange stores) - so I'm assuming that
> most should be fine.
>
>
>
> I know I've heard some of you say that you'd never virtualize
> everything, so are DCs the only systems you'd leave on a physical box?
> (Mind you, this is outside the obvious systems where you'd get no ROI)
>
>
> Comments?
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Rick
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> ~   ~
>
> 
> myhosting.com - Premium MicrosoftR WindowsR and Linux web and application
> hosting - http://link.myhosting.com/myhosting
>
>
>
> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> ~   ~
>
>
> ~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
> ~   ~

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: Page file of Exchange 2003, 1.05 times the RAM or 1.5 times?

[Michael B. Smith]

1.5 is the right number. Can you tell me the rule number link, so I can have
it fixed?

Regards,

Michael B. Smith
MCITP:EM/MCSE/Exchange MVP
http://TheEssentialExchange.com


-Original Message-
From: Ajay Kulsh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 10:39 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Page file of Exchange 2003, 1.05 times the RAM or 1.5 times?

In most place, we read that the pagefile of a Windows server should be at
least 1.5 X RAM. However, latest version of ExBPA tool gives error in such a
case and tell us to make pagefile only 1.05 X RAM.

Should we reduce the file size on Exchange server to only 1.05 X RAM?
Thanks.

Jay Kulsh
So. Pasadena, CA



~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

RE: Citrix printing question

[Tom Miller]

I thought about doing that but instead keep the timeout short
specifically for security reasons, since many of my remote users are
using PCs at our locations that are not secure.  We also have a policy
that states users are to log off when not using the system, since we
have more users than licenses.  

>>> "Webster" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 6/24/2008 11:07 PM >>>

From:Tom Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Subject: RE: Citrix printing question

 

I use the Citrix VPN client with the Access Gateway, then connect my
PNAgent to my internal network.  I like that since it does not time out
like the web interface.  
 
Then change the timeout of the Web Interface!  With PS 4.0 that is done
thru IIS.  With PS/XA 4.5 that is done thru the Access Management
Console, web interface site, manage session preferences, web sessions. 
I change it to something like 8 or 10 hours so it doesn’t timeout during
a work day.
 
Webster




Confidentiality Notice:  This e-mail message, including attachments, is
for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain
confidential and privileged information.  Any unauthorized review, use,
disclosure, or distribution is prohibited.  If you are not the intended
recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all
copies of the original message.

~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Re: NTBackup failing on large files

[David W. McSpadden]

SQL is Backing up to a HP Storage Array 30 with a Raid 5 drive of 6 SAS drives 
at 10k rpm each.
  - Original Message - 
  From: HELP_PC 
  To: NT System Admin Issues 
  Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 1:51 AM
  Subject: R: NTBackup failing on large files


  Where are you backing up to ?

  Network or local ?


  GuidoElia
  HELPPC




--
  Da: David W. McSpadden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  Inviato: martedì 24 giugno 2008 20.59
  A: NT System Admin Issues
  Oggetto: NTBackup failing on large files


  I am running Windows Server Enterprise 2003.
  I am running SQL Enterprise 2003.
  On a 32 bit install.
  I run SQL backup everynight.
  I have a 60GB backup file for my production database.
  I run NTBackup and it backup up all the databases except the Production 
database.
  It runs for about 2 hours backing it up and then fails within about 300 Mb of 
finishing stating the file is inconsistant.
  Has anyone seen this?





  Data Security is everyone's responsibility.










__

This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are property of Indiana Members 
Credit Union, are confidential, and are intended solely for the use of the 
individual or entity to whom this e-mail is addressed. If you are not one of 
the named recipient(s) or otherwise have reason to believe that you have 
received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete this 
message immediately from your computer. Any other use, retention, 
dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this email is strictly 
prohibited.

This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 
__


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~

Re: NTBackup failing on large files

[David W. McSpadden]

LTO-3 Scsi device.

  - Original Message - 
  From: HELP_PC 
  To: NT System Admin Issues 
  Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 1:51 AM
  Subject: R: NTBackup failing on large files


  Where are you backing up to ?

  Network or local ?


  GuidoElia
  HELPPC




--
  Da: David W. McSpadden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  Inviato: martedì 24 giugno 2008 20.59
  A: NT System Admin Issues
  Oggetto: NTBackup failing on large files


  I am running Windows Server Enterprise 2003.
  I am running SQL Enterprise 2003.
  On a 32 bit install.
  I run SQL backup everynight.
  I have a 60GB backup file for my production database.
  I run NTBackup and it backup up all the databases except the Production 
database.
  It runs for about 2 hours backing it up and then fails within about 300 Mb of 
finishing stating the file is inconsistant.
  Has anyone seen this?





  Data Security is everyone's responsibility.










__

This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are property of Indiana Members 
Credit Union, are confidential, and are intended solely for the use of the 
individual or entity to whom this e-mail is addressed. If you are not one of 
the named recipient(s) or otherwise have reason to believe that you have 
received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete this 
message immediately from your computer. Any other use, retention, 
dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this email is strictly 
prohibited.

This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 
__


~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!~
~   ~