[Veritas-bu] NBU 5 EOL
Anyone know at all when Netbackup 5.0 will be end of life or end of support? I cant seem to find info on the site. Needle haystack and all that. cheers ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Same jobid, but different return status from bperror bpdbjobs
Same backup ID. I run bperror on it and see that it successfully completed. I run bpdbjobs and see that it it had exit status 228. This is disturbing. Any one know why bperror and bpdbjobs don't agree? # bperror -U -jobid 1852058 -hoursago 72 TIMESERVER/CLIENT TEXT 01/09/2007 00:39:24 nbserver clientXX added backup job (jobid=1852058) for client clientXX, policy VAR_LOGS, schedule daily part 0 to NetBackup scheduler work queue 01/09/2007 04:59:09 nbserver clientXX started backup job for client clientXX, policy VAR_LOGS, schedule daily on storage unit IBM_nbserver 01/09/2007 04:59:46 nbserver clientXX client clientXX handling path /var/logs/prd . . . . . . 01/09/2007 06:10:45 nbserver clientXX CLIENT clientXX POLICY VAR_LOGS SCHED daily EXIT STATUS 0 (the requested operation was successfully completed) # bpdbjobs -most_columns -jobid 1852058 1852058,0,3,228,VAR_LOGS,daily,clientXX,nbserver,1168321164,019881,1168341045,IBM,1,,400640,6,,100,11192,root,1,0,1,99,,nbserver,4,7,0,,,0,0,1852057,627,1,11199,0,,,1,0,0,clientXX_1168336753,, ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Same jobid, but different return status from bper ror bpdbjobs
Would it be due to the number of retries ? for example, the 1st try got 228, but 2nd retry completed in a 0 ? Regards Simon Weaver 3rd Line Technical Support Windows Domain Administrator EADS Astrium Limited, B23AA IM (DCS) Anchorage Road, Portsmouth, PO3 5PU Email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: i node [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 12 January 2007 14:18 To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Same jobid,but different return status from bperror bpdbjobs Same backup ID. I run bperror on it and see that it successfully completed. I run bpdbjobs and see that it it had exit status 228. This is disturbing. Any one know why bperror and bpdbjobs don't agree? # bperror -U -jobid 1852058 -hoursago 72 TIMESERVER/CLIENT TEXT 01/09/2007 00:39:24 nbserver clientXX added backup job (jobid=1852058) for client clientXX, policy VAR_LOGS, schedule daily part 0 to NetBackup scheduler work queue 01/09/2007 04:59:09 nbserver clientXX started backup job for client clientXX, policy VAR_LOGS, schedule daily on storage unit IBM_nbserver 01/09/2007 04:59:46 nbserver clientXX client clientXX handling path /var/logs/prd . . . . . . 01/09/2007 06:10:45 nbserver clientXX CLIENT clientXX POLICY VAR_LOGS SCHED daily EXIT STATUS 0 (the requested operation was successfully completed) # bpdbjobs -most_columns -jobid 1852058 1852058,0,3,228,VAR_LOGS,daily,clientXX,nbserver,1168321164,019881,11683 41045,IBM,1,,400640,6,,100,11192,root,1,0,1,99,,nbserver,4,7,0,,,0,0,1852057 ,627,1,11199,0,,,1,0,0,clientXX_1168336753,, This email (including any attachments) may contain confidential and/or privileged information or information otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately, do not copy this message or any attachments and do not use it for any purpose or disclose its content to any person, but delete this message and any attachments from your system. Astrium disclaims any and all liability if this email transmission was virus corrupted, altered or falsified. - Astrium Limited, Registered in England and Wales No. 2449259 Registered Office: Gunnels Wood Road, Stevenage, Hertfordshire, SG1 2AS, England___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] NBU 5 EOL
Here is where you can check any version roadmap http://www.symantec.com/enterprise/support/release_details.jsp?pid=15143 Release Date: December 1, 2003 End of Support Life: October 3, 2007 Bob Stump Analysts International contracted to: State of Michigan DIT IS TS Backup and Recovery 7285 Parsons Drive Lansing, MI 48913 Tel: (517) 636-4076 Fax: (517) 636-0402 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dave Markham [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1/12/2007 8:42 AM Anyone know at all when Netbackup 5.0 will be end of life or end of support? I cant seem to find info on the site. Needle haystack and all that. cheers ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] 6.0 Mp4 Weirdness
I'm having issues with netbackup not see'ing newly added tapes in our two autoloaders. A DSSU is assigned to each autoloader. For some reason, the inventory works but the manual relocation does not find any available media(errors 191 and 96). The server is NB 6.0 MP4 running on sparc with Solaris 10. Normally I have enough tape BUT i'm still fighting with my other tape drive (lto2 only backing up 125GB of data to the tape) I'm on hold with veritas support waiting for an agent(23 minutes) to route the call. Karl___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Install error
NBInstdlg cannot load resdll.dll Has anyone resolved this error in trying to install the NB client on a Windows server? The server is Windows 2000. It had 4.5 and I was trying to update to 5.1MP5. Got 5.1 installed and the error started with MP5. I have uninstalled the client (cleaned registry and non-plugandplay drivers) and now I can't get 4.5 to install again either. Regards ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] remote admin java program for nb 5.0
Nb 5.0 mp6 Solaris 9 I am looking to download a 5.0 remote admin java client fro my windows xp laptop so I can remotely manage 5.0 servers. I have a new laptop and someone here has misplaced the 5.0 cd that has this on it. Any help? Greg This e-mail and any attachments are confidential, may contain legal, professional or other privileged information, and are intended solely for the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, do not use the information in this e-mail in any way, delete this e-mail and notify the sender. CEG-IP2 ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Odd byte counts in restore log
Trying to figure out what this means (other than it couldn't write the file because it thought it was out of space): 12:32:41 (166920.001) Could only write 82944 of 262144 bytes to file /database/olaprdo/temp04.dbf at file offset 3 gigabytes + 1914412032 bytes 12:32:41 (166920.001) Couldn't write to file /database/olaprdo/temp04.dbf: No space left on device The original file was actually 5242888192 bytes. Looking at the target filesystem given its current space available I can see that this file wouldn't have fit. I'm just trying to figure out where it determined the numbers seen in the first line of the message as they don't seem to relate directly either to the filesystem size or the original file size. Notes: We do have largefiles turned on for this vxfs filesystem. We also know we don't need the above file for Oracle to start as we can delete it. I'm just curious about the odd numbers it shows. This is NB 5.1 MP4 on HP-UX running Veritas Volume Manager and Veritas File System. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] NB 6.0 MP3 and NOM
Is there anyone out there running NB 6.0 MP3 and Network Operations Manager? I am trying to get some reporting out for the management type people, and we are running into the following error message: Operation Manager: Job Monitor failed. We can report on everything except the status of jobs, which is the most important thing... Any thoughts? Veritas's solution is to tell up to upgrade to MP4 - they wont even troubleshoot with it. It is extremely frustrating... Win2k3 - Master Server Virtual Win2k3 (Vmware) - NOM 4 Media Servers - Win 2k3 Regards, -cj Courtenay Jones Unix Administrator Wolseley North America - Systems Engineering 8020 Arco Corporate Drive Raleigh, NC 27617 Phone: 919-431-1882 / Cell: 919-673-3983 ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] adding new tape drives in solaris
What process do you guys go through to add new fiber chanel tape drives under Solaris? my standard process is as follows: / cfgadm -al -o show_FCP_dev ...gets a view of devices attached to FC controllers, and verify they all show up similar to the following: c4::1000c954e9de,2 tape connectedconfigured unknown but sometimes things show up like: c4::1000c954ea4c,0 tape connectedunconfigured unknown ..in which case, I'll run: / cfgadm -c configure c# - where # is the relevant controller (HBA port) then hopefully, everything will come up configuredif it doesn't, powercycle the device, verify it logs into the fabric, then repeat the above. once everything above is complete, I will run... /usr/openv/volmgr/bin/sg.build all -mt 15 -ml 6 - which allows up to 6 luns (tape drives) on each controller...typically there's only one, LUN0 per tape drive I'll verify the proper strings are in the /kernel/drv/st.conf, then reboot with the reconfigure option. after rebooting: / /usr/bin/rm -f /kernel/drv/sg.conf / /usr/openv/volmgr/bin/driver/sg.install then devfsadm, or reboot -- -r again. then sgscan, and config the drive in NBU. that seems to be the standard process, that *should* work, and does probably 50% of the timethe other 50% of the time, if it doesn't work the first try, then I can spend hours upon hours upon hours, trying to get everything working. sometimes, all the devices show up as configured when I do a cfgadm -al -o show_FCP_dev, then when I configure the drivers, and reboot, they're unconfigured again, or worse, configured but failing/unusable. then there's the times when everthing show up as configured, and usable, , the driver rebuild is fine, but devfsadm, or a reboot -- -r only creates device files for half the drives..it's absolutely infuriating. Any advice for easy, reliable, repeatable, stress free device configuration?? Paul La version française suit le texte anglais. This email may contain privileged and/or confidential information, and the Bank of Canada does not waive any related rights. Any distribution, use, or copying of this email or the information it contains by other than the intended recipient is unauthorized. If you received this email in error please delete it immediately from your system and notify the sender promptly by email that you have done so. Le présent courriel peut contenir de l'information privilégiée ou confidentielle. La Banque du Canada ne renonce pas aux droits qui s'y rapportent. Toute diffusion, utilisation ou copie de ce courriel ou des renseignements qu'il contient par une personne autre que le ou les destinataires désignés est interdite. Si vous recevez ce courriel par erreur, veuillez le supprimer immédiatement et envoyer sans délai à l'expéditeur un message électronique pour l'aviser que vous avez éliminé de votre ordinateur toute copie du courriel reçu. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Data Domain with NBU
Mr Preston - thanks so much - that's actually so funny...you are the reason why I had this string on the auburn list because of something you said at one of your backup school seminars. Pretty awesome! Mike _ From: Curtis Preston [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, January 12, 2007 2:07 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Conner, Mike Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] Data Domain with NBU Not sure I agree with you on the comment about competition. First, they're more in competition NetApp's de-dupe NearStore, and they're the main vendor that's helping NBU to move forward with the DSU stuff. (NetApp's probably a close second and may be a tie.) NBU is making their DSU/DSSU stuff better, and will soon be charging for it, and Data Domain is leading that charge. Translation: Symantec loves Data Domain. I don't think there's any support issues to worry about there. As to being in competition with Puredisk, the two products are actually quite different and are aiming at two different problems. Puredisk is aimed at solving remote backup and DD is aimed at being an inexpensive, high performance target for all backups. We'll see how it all plays out, but I see them being a perfect fit together. One's for remote data, and the other is for data center data. If Puredisk is similar in performance to other remote office solution's I've seen, I doubt it will even come close to competing with DD in performance. BUT, DD costs tens of thousands per box and you're not going to put one of those in every remote site if you've only got a 100 GB of data. That's where Puredisk would play well. Just my $.02. --- W. Curtis Preston Author of O'Reilly's Backup Recovery and Using SANs and NAS VP Data Protection GlassHouse Technologies _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 9:52 AM To: Conner, Mike Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Data Domain with NBU Mike, If you use NDMP backups, avoid it, we had to use there VLT solution, and found a major bug in the code. They state that the code fix will not be GA until July of this year. There support is great, very helpful and knowledgeable. Read the fine print, and get a copy of the support matrix, as they refer to it quite a bit before they start troubleshooting. To be honest, the DDR's are in competition with NBU and there remote office solution, so do not expect support from the NBU side either. DataDomain is more targeted toward CommVault, and Legato, not NBU. I would look at the support matrix from NBU as well. I hope this helps. Steve Bally Systems Engineer RadiSys Corporation www.radisys.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] Desk: 503-615-1207 Cell: 503-970-6201 This electronic message (Email) contains information which may be confidential, privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure. The information is intended to be used solely by the named recipient(s). If you are not a named recipient, any review, disclosure, copying, distribution or use of this transmission or its contents is prohibited. If you have received this transmission (Email) in error, please notify me immediately. Conner, Mike [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 01/11/2007 08:49 AM To veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu cc Subject [Veritas-bu] Data Domain with NBU We have NBU 5.1 MP5, Windows, VMWare, SQL, Exchange. Does anyone have any experience with Data Domain and how it integrates with Netbackup 5.1 or 6.x? We are currently talking with Data Domain, but I'd like to hear what experiences are... Thanks Mike ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Data Domain with NBU
Not sure I agree with you on the comment about competition. First, they're more in competition NetApp's de-dupe NearStore, and they're the main vendor that's helping NBU to move forward with the DSU stuff. (NetApp's probably a close second and may be a tie.) NBU is making their DSU/DSSU stuff better, and will soon be charging for it, and Data Domain is leading that charge. Translation: Symantec loves Data Domain. I don't think there's any support issues to worry about there. As to being in competition with Puredisk, the two products are actually quite different and are aiming at two different problems. Puredisk is aimed at solving remote backup and DD is aimed at being an inexpensive, high performance target for all backups. We'll see how it all plays out, but I see them being a perfect fit together. One's for remote data, and the other is for data center data. If Puredisk is similar in performance to other remote office solution's I've seen, I doubt it will even come close to competing with DD in performance. BUT, DD costs tens of thousands per box and you're not going to put one of those in every remote site if you've only got a 100 GB of data. That's where Puredisk would play well. Just my $.02. --- W. Curtis Preston Author of O'Reilly's Backup Recovery and Using SANs and NAS VP Data Protection GlassHouse Technologies From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 9:52 AM To: Conner, Mike Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Data Domain with NBU Mike, If you use NDMP backups, avoid it, we had to use there VLT solution, and found a major bug in the code. They state that the code fix will not be GA until July of this year. There support is great, very helpful and knowledgeable. Read the fine print, and get a copy of the support matrix, as they refer to it quite a bit before they start troubleshooting. To be honest, the DDR's are in competition with NBU and there remote office solution, so do not expect support from the NBU side either. DataDomain is more targeted toward CommVault, and Legato, not NBU. I would look at the support matrix from NBU as well. I hope this helps. Steve Bally Systems Engineer RadiSys Corporation www.radisys.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] Desk: 503-615-1207 Cell: 503-970-6201 This electronic message (Email) contains information which may be confidential, privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure. The information is intended to be used solely by the named recipient(s). If you are not a named recipient, any review, disclosure, copying, distribution or use of this transmission or its contents is prohibited. If you have received this transmission (Email) in error, please notify me immediately. Conner, Mike [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 01/11/2007 08:49 AM To veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu cc Subject [Veritas-bu] Data Domain with NBU We have NBU 5.1 MP5, Windows, VMWare, SQL, Exchange. Does anyone have any experience with Data Domain and how it integrates with Netbackup 5.1 or 6.x? We are currently talking with Data Domain, but I'd like to hear what experiences are... Thanks Mike ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Data Domain with NBU
Mr. Preston is my dad. I'm Mr. Backup. ;) --- W. Curtis Preston Author of O'Reilly's Backup Recovery and Using SANs and NAS VP Data Protection GlassHouse Technologies From: Conner, Mike [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, January 12, 2007 11:08 AM To: Curtis Preston; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] Data Domain with NBU Mr Preston - thanks so much - that's actually so funny...you are the reason why I had this string on the auburn list because of something you said at one of your backup school seminars. Pretty awesome! Mike From: Curtis Preston [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, January 12, 2007 2:07 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Conner, Mike Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] Data Domain with NBU Not sure I agree with you on the comment about competition. First, they're more in competition NetApp's de-dupe NearStore, and they're the main vendor that's helping NBU to move forward with the DSU stuff. (NetApp's probably a close second and may be a tie.) NBU is making their DSU/DSSU stuff better, and will soon be charging for it, and Data Domain is leading that charge. Translation: Symantec loves Data Domain. I don't think there's any support issues to worry about there. As to being in competition with Puredisk, the two products are actually quite different and are aiming at two different problems. Puredisk is aimed at solving remote backup and DD is aimed at being an inexpensive, high performance target for all backups. We'll see how it all plays out, but I see them being a perfect fit together. One's for remote data, and the other is for data center data. If Puredisk is similar in performance to other remote office solution's I've seen, I doubt it will even come close to competing with DD in performance. BUT, DD costs tens of thousands per box and you're not going to put one of those in every remote site if you've only got a 100 GB of data. That's where Puredisk would play well. Just my $.02. --- W. Curtis Preston Author of O'Reilly's Backup Recovery and Using SANs and NAS VP Data Protection GlassHouse Technologies From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 9:52 AM To: Conner, Mike Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Data Domain with NBU Mike, If you use NDMP backups, avoid it, we had to use there VLT solution, and found a major bug in the code. They state that the code fix will not be GA until July of this year. There support is great, very helpful and knowledgeable. Read the fine print, and get a copy of the support matrix, as they refer to it quite a bit before they start troubleshooting. To be honest, the DDR's are in competition with NBU and there remote office solution, so do not expect support from the NBU side either. DataDomain is more targeted toward CommVault, and Legato, not NBU. I would look at the support matrix from NBU as well. I hope this helps. Steve Bally Systems Engineer RadiSys Corporation www.radisys.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] Desk: 503-615-1207 Cell: 503-970-6201 This electronic message (Email) contains information which may be confidential, privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure. The information is intended to be used solely by the named recipient(s). If you are not a named recipient, any review, disclosure, copying, distribution or use of this transmission or its contents is prohibited. If you have received this transmission (Email) in error, please notify me immediately. Conner, Mike [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 01/11/2007 08:49 AM To veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu cc Subject [Veritas-bu] Data Domain with NBU We have NBU 5.1 MP5, Windows, VMWare, SQL, Exchange. Does anyone have any experience with Data Domain and how it integrates with Netbackup 5.1 or 6.x? We are currently talking with Data Domain, but I'd like to hear what experiences are... Thanks Mike ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Odd byte counts in restore log
OK so you're saying the 82944 of 262144 is just telling me about a single block. It was that which was confusing me - I thought it was saying 82944 of 262144 for the total file which obviously was way to low and didn't know how it related to the rest. Anyway as noted we've brought up the DB by telling it to delete the temp file as it isn't really necessary. As stated I was just trying to figure out what the message was saying. -Original Message- From: bob944 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, January 12, 2007 3:21 PM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; Jeff Lightner Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] Odd byte counts in restore log Trying to figure out what this means (other than it couldn't write the file because it thought it was out of space): 12:32:41 (166920.001) Could only write 82944 of 262144 bytes to file /database/olaprdo/temp04.dbf at file offset 3 gigabytes + 1914412032 bytes 12:32:41 (166920.001) Couldn't write to file /database/olaprdo/temp04.dbf: No space left on device The original file was actually 5242888192 bytes. Looking at the target filesystem given its current space available I can see that this file wouldn't have fit. I'm just trying to figure out where it determined the numbers seen in the first line of the message as they don't seem to relate directly either to the filesystem size or the original file size. Not sure which numbers you are concerned with, but you're using a 256KB block size, and write() returned an error after 82944 bytes of that block were written. That's 162 disk-drive, 512-byte blocks. If they're computing GB correctly (not like the dumb new ISO standard!), 3GB = 2^30 * 3 = 3221225472, and if it got through 1914412032 more, it was up to 5135637504 before it ran out. Just tack another 107250688 bytes onto that disk and you're good to go. :-) ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Odd byte counts in restore log
Trying to figure out what this means (other than it couldn't write the file because it thought it was out of space): 12:32:41 (166920.001) Could only write 82944 of 262144 bytes to file /database/olaprdo/temp04.dbf at file offset 3 gigabytes + 1914412032 bytes 12:32:41 (166920.001) Couldn't write to file /database/olaprdo/temp04.dbf: No space left on device The original file was actually 5242888192 bytes. Looking at the target filesystem given its current space available I can see that this file wouldn't have fit. I'm just trying to figure out where it determined the numbers seen in the first line of the message as they don't seem to relate directly either to the filesystem size or the original file size. Not sure which numbers you are concerned with, but you're using a 256KB block size, and write() returned an error after 82944 bytes of that block were written. That's 162 disk-drive, 512-byte blocks. If they're computing GB correctly (not like the dumb new ISO standard!), 3GB = 2^30 * 3 = 3221225472, and if it got through 1914412032 more, it was up to 5135637504 before it ran out. Just tack another 107250688 bytes onto that disk and you're good to go. :-) ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Same jobid, but different return status from bperror and bpdbjobs
Please do check on how the formatting is done in the bp.conf of your master server for the bpdbjobs output. ciao Ankur Kumar [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sucker-punch spam with award-winning protection. Try the free Yahoo! Mail Beta. http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/features_spam.html ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Install error
Hi Steve, could you please check out the permissions from the DCOMcnfg.exe tool please do have a word with the Windows Admin to check up on the Default permissions tab ciao Ankur Kumar [EMAIL PROTECTED] No need to miss a message. Get email on-the-go with Yahoo! Mail for Mobile. Get started. http://mobile.yahoo.com/mail ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Performance Problems
I'm finally getting around to performance tuning the new hardware and my hair is now officially on fire. To say the storage is slow, is like saying the south pole is chilly. Performance is TERRIBLE. Not just in Netbackup, but generally speaking I can't copy files to these volumes at 30MB/sec. So I've got some questions and I try and tweak better performance. NBU 6.0 MP4 on Windows 2003 MP1 Dell PowerEdge 2950s w/ Dual Core Xeon 3.2 Ghz Processors 4GB Ram Storage - Dell MD1000 w/ 15 7,200RMD SATAII Drives 1 - Dell is floating the idea that because my memory runs at 667Mhz and my FSB runs at 1066Mhz that it could be causing a traffic jam. Anyone put any stock in this idea? They suggest 533Mhz RAM which fits much more nicely with the 1066FSB. 2 - Anyone using NTFS compression on DSUs or DSSUs 500GB? I realise you take the compression hit on 4KB NTFS Cluster sizes and compression speeds, but I want to know if its possible to use NTFS on a volume and gert descent read/write speeds from a DSU / DSSU. 3 - I'm assuming my best transfer speeds are going to be NBU with 64KB SIZE_DATA_BUFFERS pumping 64KB NTFS Clusters on a 14 Disk Raid5 array w/ 64KB Stripe. I guess its possible multiples of 64KB would be ok as well. 4 - From some perspectives it looks just like the hardware isn't moving data fast enough. But I guess its also fair to say that NBU isn't driving the hardware to move the data any faster. With the exception of Buffer settings is there anyway to shift the NBU I/O realted processes into high gear? Increasing the buffer sizes and adding more buffers only help until a certain point. 5 - Does anyone run NBU w/ the /PAE or /3GB switches in windows? Any improvement in performance. Any input is appreciated. I'm going home for some RR before I come back in next week to beat my head against the wall some more. -Jonathan ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Performance Problems
On 1/12/2007 3:54 PM, Martin, Jonathan (Contractor) wrote: I'm finally getting around to performance tuning the new hardware and my hair is now officially on fire. To say the storage is slow, is like saying the south pole is chilly. Performance is TERRIBLE. Not just in Netbackup, but generally speaking I can't copy files to these volumes at 30MB/sec. It appears you've done the first step and eliminated NetBackup from the picture since you say that performance is terrible outside of NetBackup. Start with some standard benchmarks like iometer so that you can duplicate the tests as you make changes. NBU 6.0 MP4 on Windows 2003 MP1 This is now irrelevant. You said you've got a performance issue outside of NetBackup. Get that fixed first. Dell PowerEdge 2950s w/ Dual Core Xeon 3.2 Ghz Processors 4GB Ram Storage - Dell MD1000 w/ 15 7,200RMD SATAII Drives SATA is designed for capacity, not performance. 1 - Dell is floating the idea that because my memory runs at 667Mhz and my FSB runs at 1066Mhz that it could be causing a traffic jam. Anyone put any stock in this idea? They suggest 533Mhz RAM which fits much more nicely with the 1066FSB. That sounds like somebody doesn't know what they're talking about. There's no way that the memory differences are going to make *that* much of a difference. 2 - Anyone using NTFS compression on DSUs or DSSUs 500GB? I realise you take the compression hit on 4KB NTFS Cluster sizes and compression speeds, but I want to know if its possible to use NTFS on a volume and gert descent read/write speeds from a DSU / DSSU. You would take a massive performance hit on the CPU. Don't try it until you have the hardware working properly to start with, and then you can tweak from there. 3 - I'm assuming my best transfer speeds are going to be NBU Remember, you've already eliminated NetBackup. Leave it alone for now. on a 14 Disk Raid5 array w/64KB Stripe. I guess its possible multiples of 64KB would be ok as well. That RAID-5 set is *way* too large. Don't forget that for every RAID-5 write, you're going to have to read from the remaining 13 members to calculate the parity. Given the reliability of SATA drives, you're also setting yourself up for failure of the array due to a double-disk failure. At a minimum, create 2 separate RAID-5 sets. Ideally, keep your RAID-5 sets to 4 or 5 members. 4 - From some perspectives it looks just like the hardware isn't moving data fast enough. But I guess its also fair to say that NBU isn't driving the hardware to move the data any faster. With the exception of Buffer settings is there anyway to shift the NBU I/O realted processes into high gear? Increasing the buffer sizes and adding more buffers only help until a certain point. I googled a bit and ran across an article (http://forums.storagereview.net/index.php?showtopic=23323) that said: I'm currently testing the Dell PERC 5/E, based on the Intel IOP333, and it's pushing over 510MB/s read STR and 314MB/s write STR with 14 Fujitsu MAX3036RC drives in RAID 5. The drives are connected through a SAS expander with a 1,2GB/s wide port between controller and expander. The database performance of this setup is truly stunning (I can post some benchmarks if anyone is interested). That looksl ike it's using SAS drives so I don't think you're maxing out the controller. So...start with benchmarks, and then follow up with the Windows and storage tuning folks. Once you've got Windows writing at the performance it should be, then worry about NetBackup tuning. .../Ed -- Ed Wilts, Mounds View, MN, USA mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
