Re: [Veritas-bu] Oracle BCV on EMC Clariion systems ?
Hi Michael, The name of BCV on Sym is SnapView on Clarrion. You can read some good information in this document : http://www.emc.com/techlib/pdf/H2259_clariion_snapview_mirrorview_Oracle_10g_wo_ldv.pdf Have a good day, Didier Michael Graff Andersen a écrit : Hello All Have anybody done a Oracle BCV backup/restore on an EMC Clariion disk system ? Has found a whitepaper for a Oracle BCV on a Symmetrix, but have Clariion disk systems Regards Michael ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Veritas-bu Digest, Vol 18, Issue 47
Jack, What happens then when a tape drive attached to the Media Server fails ? All clients backing up to this Media Server will have a failed backup. Or do you select Any Available as option for the Policy storage unit in the policies attributes ? Best Regards, Bart WALLEBROEK ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Veritas-bu Digest, Vol 18, Issue 47
On Fri, 26 Oct 2007, WALLEBROEK Bart wrote: Jack, What happens then when a tape drive attached to the Media Server fails ? All clients backing up to this Media Server will have a failed backup. Or do you select Any Available as option for the Policy storage unit in the policies attributes ? Best Regards, Bart WALLEBROEK ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu Hi, You make a storage group with more than 1 media server. For restores, you can add failover or force restore media servers. In this case, you'd want a failover, when it fails, it will use the other media servers you tell it to perform the restore. Problem solved. Justin. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] New oracle backup planning
We will be migrating a very large database application to a platform running redhat and oracle. So to use rman backups with veritas netbackup I'm assuming we only need the redhat client/licenses and veritas oracle agent licenses. We will be at version 6.4 by the time this migration takes place. Aside from the implementation are there any other netbackup pieces/purchases necessary? Scott Deiter System Administrator Hanover Direct, Inc. Hanover, PA Voice: 717-633-3298 Fax: 717-633-3101 ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] VxVM VxFS EOSL
Guys sorry for posting but hopefully someone can help. Im trying to find a recent sheet for EOSL on Veritas file system and Veritas Volume Manager. Also what are the current versions. I've only found this so far which was written in 2004. Anyone point me in the right direction? http://ftp.support.veritas.com/pub/support/products/VolumeManager_UNIX/265465.pdf I have tried searching the sites but i can never seem to find what i need. Cheers ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] New oracle backup planning
On Fri, 26 Oct 2007, Deiter, Scott wrote: We will be migrating a very large database application to a platform running redhat and oracle. So to use rman backups with veritas netbackup I'm assuming we only need the redhat client/licenses and veritas oracle agent licenses. We will be at version 6.4 by the time this migration takes place. Aside from the implementation are there any other netbackup pieces/purchases necessary? Scott Deiter System Administrator Hanover Direct, Inc. Hanover, PA Voice: 717-633-3298 Fax: 717-633-3101 ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu Depends what you want to do, VTLs? Disk based backups? SSO? Also there is no 6.4. There is 6.0MP1,2,3,4,5 and 6.5. Justin. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] how to see whether the device has lock
Hi, Although the drive is empty, It seems as if it is being used master server. Due to that, that drive can not be used by policies. Is there any command to see there is a lock on it?Is there any command to clear the lock to re-use it without stopping netbackup daemons? Regards, Asiye Yigit ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] New oracle backup planning
My apologies for not being very specific. Netbackup enterprise server 6.0 mp 4. Solaris 9 master. Red Hat v5.0 Media server with SSO Fibre connected to an SL500 with 6 SDLT drives. Oracle 10 Rman backups will run directly to tape. So to use rman backups with veritas netbackup I'm assuming we only need The SSO, redhat client, and veritas oracle agent licenses Scott Deiter System Administrator Hanover Direct, Inc. Hanover, PA Voice: 717-633-3298 Fax: 717-633-3101 -Original Message- From: Justin Piszcz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 26, 2007 10:17 AM To: Deiter, Scott Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] New oracle backup planning On Fri, 26 Oct 2007, Deiter, Scott wrote: We will be migrating a very large database application to a platform running redhat and oracle. So to use rman backups with veritas netbackup I'm assuming we only need the redhat client/licenses and veritas oracle agent licenses. We will be at version 6.4 by the time this migration takes place. Aside from the implementation are there any other netbackup pieces/purchases necessary? Scott Deiter System Administrator Hanover Direct, Inc. Hanover, PA Voice: 717-633-3298 Fax: 717-633-3101 ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu Depends what you want to do, VTLs? Disk based backups? SSO? Also there is no 6.4. There is 6.0MP1,2,3,4,5 and 6.5. Justin. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Tapeless backup environments
Hmmm.. I need to look into this further. I could have sworn that it stores a checksum per file backed up, and that it used that checksum when it restored the file to see if the restored file is the same as the backup. I wonder if we can get an authoritative answer on this from a Symantec lurker. --- W. Curtis Preston Backup Blog @ www.backupcentral.com VP Data Protection, GlassHouse Technologies -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 12:26 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Tapeless backup environments Nope - I don't think Netbackup is making checksums. Tape hardware seems to be reasonably adept at detecting big tape errors, though. This, of course, goes away with disk based backups. bpverify is just a check of the tape contents vs the media catalog. It does read the tape blocks so it may allow the drive to detect a media error but it's not a verification of the block integrity vs some stored checksum. DESCRIPTION bpverify verifies the contents of one or more backups by reading the backup volume and comparing its contents to the NetBackup catalog. This operation does not compare the data on the volume with the contents of the client disk. However, it does read each block in the image, thus verifying that the volume is readable. NetBackup verifies only one backup at a time and tries to minimize media mounts and positioning time. -M -Original Message- From: Len Boyle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 6:37 PM To: Donaldson, Mark - Broomfield, CO; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: RE: Re: [Veritas-bu] Tapeless backup environments Hello Mark, Did I read in this list that netbackup was supposed to do some kind of checksum on the data written to tape? If so would a bpverify check this. I would assume that if netbackup does this it would find the error. because netbackup would do it's calc before passing the block to the dedupe hardware/software. And the block that it gets back from the dedupe hardware/software would be different. Of course the brings on the question with the Symantec/Veritas pure disk product or emc's as the netbackup and the dedupe parts are merged one would not have this double check. At least I would not think that one would. len -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 4:52 PM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Tapeless backup environments I think that part of the problem is that a hash duplication is nearly undetectable until you have restored and tested it as false. We all know that 99.999% of what we back up is never restored. It just ages gracefully on media and is expired. If any of that .001% is restored and is damaged due to a tape fault (and we've all had it happen) then we all know that we can usually reach back to a different version or different tape and we'll be close enough to make the user go away and let us return to our coffee and surfing. I think a big part of the worry of a hash collision is that the restore seems to happen, the file restores flawlessly, and it'll not be detectable unless someone can checksum the whole file or it's a binary or similar that simply refuses to work. Again, restoring from a different tape, different version may be ineffective depending on where the hash collision occurred and for what reason. Every version may use this same unchanging block which is restore incorrectly due to an invalid hash match. I know the odds are astronomical but I still remember that even though the odds are 150 million to one I'll win the lottery, I still see smiling faces on TV holding giant checks. It's a bet, like all other restore techniques, and I'm going to make sure management has full knowledge of the risks before we implement it here (which is likely). -M -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Lightner Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 10:28 AM To: Austin Murphy; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Tapeless backup environments This paper looks to be 5 years old (based on newest references it cites - it actually cites others that go back nearly 10 years). It would be interesting to see his take on current deduplication offerings to see if the other checks they contain over simple hashing were enough to allay his concerns. One thing I've not seen in all this discussion is anyone saying they've actually experienced data loss as a result of commercial deduplication devices. Can anyone here claim that? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Austin Murphy Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 10:47 AM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject:
Re: [Veritas-bu] Tapeless backup environments
You're absolutely right. Of course, every time you copy data, you face a similar risk. Every single time you copy data from one device to another, multiple levels of CRC/ECC are used to make sure that the target copy is the same as the source copy, and there is a chance (however small) every time you make a copy that the copy will make a mistake and CRC/ECC will not pick it up. That was part of my original point that I made in the first article I wrote on the subject. Yes, I know there is a chance for a hash collision and data corruption, but there is a chance of that every time you copy data anywhere, disk to disk, disk to tape, etc -- and there's a chance you'll never know it. I just don't understand all the vitriol aimed at this particular method. I did read the paper that someone forwarded, and while the paper is quite old, I think his arguments still hold true. (He also used the birthday paradox in the same way I did, BTW.) The only part I didn't quite understand was the part where he said that you can't compare hash collisions with hardware errors (like I'm doing above). I read that part a couple of times and didn't get it. I'm not saying I understood his argument and disagree with it, mind you. I'm saying he spent only two or three paragraphs explaining that part, and at the end I didn't understand what he said. --- W. Curtis Preston Backup Blog @ www.backupcentral.com VP Data Protection, GlassHouse Technologies -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of A Darren Dunham Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 1:02 PM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Tapeless backup environments Did I read in this list that netbackup was supposed to do some kind of checksum on the data written to tape? If so would a bpverify check this. I would assume that if netbackup does this it would find the error. because netbackup would do it's calc before passing the block to the dedupe hardware/software. And the block that it gets back from the dedupe hardware/software would be different. Even if bpverify did checksum in this manner, you can't assume that it would find all such errors. The checksum can collide in a manner identical to the hash. Unless it lined up exactly with the hash algorithm, it would likely provide some additional protection, but at the same time it must include some collisions where both the block hash and the overall checksum give identical values for a replacement block. The presense of an additional checksum like this changes the specific numbers, but does not change the essential character of the issue. -- Darren Dunham [EMAIL PROTECTED] Senior Technical Consultant TAOShttp://www.taos.com/ Got some Dr Pepper? San Francisco, CA bay area This line left intentionally blank to confuse you. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Upgrade to 6.5 or 6.0MP4
6.0 MP5 has two significant bugs that I know of: 1. Compressed catalogs cannot be read when browsing backups to be restored: You have to open a support case and get a new bpdbm binary. 2. NDMP backups fail if you have tuned Netbackup with NUMBER_DATA_BUFFERS. You have to open a support case get a new bptm binary. Neil From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Cornely, David Sent: Friday, October 26, 2007 9:52 AM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Upgrade to 6.5 or 6.0MP4 Well, I'd say got to 6.0 MP5 (not MP4) since it addresses some issues in MP4, specifically things we've had issues with. I'm always very hesitant to move to any new software version of any product, be it Netbackup or anything else. But with Netbackup I've learned not to touch it until at least MP2 is out - clearly Symantec, like most software companies, considers time to market more important than addressing all bugs out of the gate so I strongly suggest 6.0MP5 unless there is a feature only available in 6.5 that you absolutely must have... caveat emptor. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 26, 2007 09:10 To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Upgrade to 6.5 or 6.0MP4 Hi there, I am looking for opinions whether or not to go to 6.5 or 6.0MP4 Currently on 5.1MP6/Solaris - Master/ Solaris, Linux, Windows, Exchange, VM - Clients/ Flashbackup, BareMetal, Oracle raw partitions, - future options Alex Gerber CISSP, CISA Senior UNIX Systems Administrator Sepracor Inc. p. 508.357.7445 f. 508.357. THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS COMMUNICATION AND ANY ATTACHMENTS HERETO IS CONFIDENTIAL, MAY BE ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE ADDRESSEE(S). IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT AN INTENDED RECIPIENT, OR AN AGENT THEREOF, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY REVIEW, USE, DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION, OR COPYING OF THIS COMMUNICATION OR ANY ATTACHMENT HERETO IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS MESSAGE IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY BY E-MAIL, AND DELETE THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE . ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] how to see whether the device has lock
running /usr/openv/netbackup/bin/admincmd/nbrbutil -dump will show anything that is currently assigned by the resource broker you can use the nbrbutil command to release resource allocations as well. run nbrbutil -help for more info Jared M. Seaton Recovery Administrator Mylan Inc. 304-554-5926 304-685-1389 (Cell) Asiye Yiğit [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 10/26/2007 11:37 AM To veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu cc Subject [Veritas-bu] how to see whether the device has lock Hi, Although the drive is empty, It seems as if it is being used master server. Due to that, that drive can not be used by policies. Is there any command to see there is a lock on it?Is there any command to clear the lock to re-use it without stopping netbackup daemons? Regards, Asiye Yigit ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu == CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message and all attachments transmitted with it may contain legally privileged, proprietary and/or confidential information intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution, duplication or other use of this message and/or its attachments is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message and its attachments. Thank you. == ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Upgrade to 6.5 or 6.0MP4
Hi there, I am looking for opinions whether or not to go to 6.5 or 6.0MP4 Currently on 5.1MP6/Solaris - Master/ Solaris, Linux, Windows, Exchange, VM - Clients/ Flashbackup, BareMetal, Oracle raw partitions, - future options Alex Gerber CISSP, CISA Senior UNIX Systems Administrator Sepracor Inc. p. 508.357.7445 f. 508.357. THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS COMMUNICATION AND ANY ATTACHMENTS HERETO IS CONFIDENTIAL, MAY BE ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE ADDRESSEE(S). IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT AN INTENDED RECIPIENT, OR AN AGENT THEREOF, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY REVIEW, USE, DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION, OR COPYING OF THIS COMMUNICATION OR ANY ATTACHMENT HERETO IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS MESSAGE IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY BY E-MAIL, AND DELETE THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE . ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] how to see whether the device has lock
Hi Jared, Many thanks for your answer. I will do that. Regards, From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 Ekim 2007 Cuma 18:42 To: Asiye Yiğit Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] how to see whether the device has lock running /usr/openv/netbackup/bin/admincmd/nbrbutil -dump will show anything that is currently assigned by the resource broker you can use the nbrbutil command to release resource allocations as well. run nbrbutil -help for more info Jared M. Seaton Recovery Administrator Mylan Inc. 304-554-5926 304-685-1389 (Cell) Asiye Yiğit [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 10/26/2007 11:37 AM To veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu cc Subject [Veritas-bu] how to see whether the device has lock Hi, Although the drive is empty, It seems as if it is being used master server. Due to that, that drive can not be used by policies. Is there any command to see there is a lock on it?Is there any command to clear the lock to re-use it without stopping netbackup daemons? Regards, Asiye Yigit ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu == CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message and all attachments transmitted with it may contain legally privileged, proprietary and/or confidential information intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution, duplication or other use of this message and/or its attachments is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message and its attachments. Thank you. == ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Upgrade to 6.5 or 6.0MP4
Well, I'd say got to 6.0 MP5 (not MP4) since it addresses some issues in MP4, specifically things we've had issues with. I'm always very hesitant to move to any new software version of any product, be it Netbackup or anything else. But with Netbackup I've learned not to touch it until at least MP2 is out - clearly Symantec, like most software companies, considers time to market more important than addressing all bugs out of the gate so I strongly suggest 6.0MP5 unless there is a feature only available in 6.5 that you absolutely must have... caveat emptor. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 26, 2007 09:10 To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Upgrade to 6.5 or 6.0MP4 Hi there, I am looking for opinions whether or not to go to 6.5 or 6.0MP4 Currently on 5.1MP6/Solaris - Master/ Solaris, Linux, Windows, Exchange, VM - Clients/ Flashbackup, BareMetal, Oracle raw partitions, - future options Alex Gerber CISSP, CISA Senior UNIX Systems Administrator Sepracor Inc. p. 508.357.7445 f. 508.357. THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS COMMUNICATION AND ANY ATTACHMENTS HERETO IS CONFIDENTIAL, MAY BE ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE ADDRESSEE(S). IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT AN INTENDED RECIPIENT, OR AN AGENT THEREOF, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY REVIEW, USE, DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION, OR COPYING OF THIS COMMUNICATION OR ANY ATTACHMENT HERETO IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS MESSAGE IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY BY E-MAIL, AND DELETE THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE . ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Upgrade to 6.5 or 6.0MP4
What, you've only got two engineering binaries applied ? You should try harder to break stuff, we've got 6! =) We keep making cracks about not needing the next MP release at all since we're already running it... John Nardello From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 26, 2007 10:25 AM To: Conner, Neil Cc: Cornely, David; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Upgrade to 6.5 or 6.0MP4 Are those 2 bugs only in 6.0 MP5 or MP4 as well? I am migrating from Solaris to AIX, and I have to tune the buffer settings on AIX media server to get good throughput. I haven't been able to test NDMP on it yet though. Jared M. Seaton Recovery Administrator Mylan Inc. 304-554-5926 304-685-1389 (Cell) Conner, Neil [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 10/26/2007 01:19 PM To Cornely, David [EMAIL PROTECTED], veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu cc Subject Re: [Veritas-bu] Upgrade to 6.5 or 6.0MP4 6.0 MP5 has two significant bugs that I know of: 1. Compressed catalogs cannot be read when browsing backups to be restored: You have to open a support case and get a new bpdbm binary. 2. NDMP backups fail if you have tuned Netbackup with NUMBER_DATA_BUFFERS. You have to open a support case get a new bptm binary. Neil From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Cornely, David Sent: Friday, October 26, 2007 9:52 AM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Upgrade to 6.5 or 6.0MP4 Well, I'd say got to 6.0 MP5 (not MP4) since it addresses some issues in MP4, specifically things we've had issues with. I'm always very hesitant to move to any new software version of any product, be it Netbackup or anything else. But with Netbackup I've learned not to touch it until at least MP2 is out - clearly Symantec, like most software companies, considers time to market more important than addressing all bugs out of the gate so I strongly suggest 6.0MP5 unless there is a feature only available in 6.5 that you absolutely must have... caveat emptor. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 26, 2007 09:10 To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Upgrade to 6.5 or 6.0MP4 Hi there, I am looking for opinions whether or not to go to 6.5 or 6.0MP4 Currently on 5.1MP6/Solaris - Master/ Solaris, Linux, Windows, Exchange, VM - Clients/ Flashbackup, BareMetal, Oracle raw partitions, - future options Alex Gerber CISSP, CISA Senior UNIX Systems Administrator Sepracor Inc. p. 508.357.7445 f. 508.357. THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS COMMUNICATION AND ANY ATTACHMENTS HERETO IS CONFIDENTIAL, MAY BE ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE ADDRESSEE(S). IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT AN INTENDED RECIPIENT, OR AN AGENT THEREOF, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY REVIEW, USE, DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION, OR COPYING OF THIS COMMUNICATION OR ANY ATTACHMENT HERETO IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS MESSAGE IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY BY E-MAIL, AND DELETE THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE . ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu == CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message and all attachments transmitted with it may contain legally privileged, proprietary and/or confidential information intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution, duplication or other use of this message and/or its attachments is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message and its attachments. Thank you. == ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Upgrade to 6.5 or 6.0MP4
Normally I would agree with the wait until mp2 scenario, but this is not a .0 release...this is still built on the 6.0 platform. Not only that, after the issues with 6.0 I know that Symantec took extra precaution with this release. That being said, I have come across three bugs so far with 6.5. However, they are either minor or would not effect that many people. The Windows Java GUI is hanging on host properties...windows administration console works fine, The authorization GUI for NOM will not open on the client's system...we only needed it to change the default admin password and we were able to do that from the command line, Staging to multiple tape drives is failing. This is the only big gotcha I have seen so far and we are still trying to track it down. I doubt many people stage to multiple drives so unless that effects you, it is not that big a deal. 6.5 has some nice advantages that may be worth going to...specifically around disk backups, integration with VTL, integration with PureDisk, and Bare Metal Restore for free. Overall, I have found it to be pretty stable so far. Reneé Carlisle ServerWare Corporation _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Conner, Neil Sent: Friday, October 26, 2007 1:13 PM To: Cornely, David; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Upgrade to 6.5 or 6.0MP4 6.0 MP5 has two significant bugs that I know of: 1. Compressed catalogs cannot be read when browsing backups to be restored: You have to open a support case and get a new bpdbm binary. 2. NDMP backups fail if you have tuned Netbackup with NUMBER_DATA_BUFFERS. You have to open a support case get a new bptm binary. Neil _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Cornely, David Sent: Friday, October 26, 2007 9:52 AM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Upgrade to 6.5 or 6.0MP4 Well, Id say got to 6.0 MP5 (not MP4) since it addresses some issues in MP4, specifically things weve had issues with. Im always very hesitant to move to any new software version of any product, be it Netbackup or anything else. But with Netbackup Ive learned not to touch it until at least MP2 is out clearly Symantec, like most software companies, considers time to market more important than addressing all bugs out of the gate so I strongly suggest 6.0MP5 unless there is a feature only available in 6.5 that you absolutely must have caveat emptor. _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 26, 2007 09:10 To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Upgrade to 6.5 or 6.0MP4 Hi there, I am looking for opinions whether or not to go to 6.5 or 6.0MP4 Currently on 5.1MP6/Solaris Master/ Solaris, Linux, Windows, Exchange, VM Clients/ Flashbackup, BareMetal, Oracle raw partitions, - future options Alex Gerber CISSP, CISA Senior UNIX Systems Administrator Sepracor Inc. p. 508.357.7445 f. 508.357. _ THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS COMMUNICATION AND ANY ATTACHMENTS HERETO IS CONFIDENTIAL, MAY BE ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE ADDRESSEE(S). IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT AN INTENDED RECIPIENT, OR AN AGENT THEREOF, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY REVIEW, USE, DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION, OR COPYING OF THIS COMMUNICATION OR ANY ATTACHMENT HERETO IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS MESSAGE IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY BY E-MAIL, AND DELETE THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE . ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] how to see whether the device has lock
It's unclear whether you're asking about an OS-level SCSI reserve that NetBackup doesn't know about, but assuming SSO and a SCSI reserve that NetBackup actually set, you want /usr/openv/volmgr/bin/vmdareq, like so: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/openv/volmgr/bin [9] vmdareq -display -D P2R0E2-9940b-05 P2R0E2-9940b-05 - RESERVED on Fri Oct 26 12:36:50 2007 phlmaster RESERVED SCAN_HOST UP (Also good, with no arguments, to make sure that your SSO-using [SAN] media servers are registering their drives properly.) Note that that's NBU 4.x/5.x speak. I can't speak to 6.x (yet). -- gabriel rosenkoetter Radian Group Inc, Unix/Linux/VMware Sysadmin / Backup Recovery [EMAIL PROTECTED], 215 231 1556 _ From: Asiye Yigit [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 26, 2007 11:30 AM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] how to see whether the device has lock Hi, Although the drive is empty, It seems as if it is being used master server. Due to that, that drive can not be used by policies. Is there any command to see there is a lock on it?Is there any command to clear the lock to re-use it without stopping netbackup daemons? Regards, Asiye Yigit ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Upgrade to 6.5 or 6.0MP4
Are those 2 bugs only in 6.0 MP5 or MP4 as well? I am migrating from Solaris to AIX, and I have to tune the buffer settings on AIX media server to get good throughput. I haven't been able to test NDMP on it yet though. Jared M. Seaton Recovery Administrator Mylan Inc. 304-554-5926 304-685-1389 (Cell) Conner, Neil [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 10/26/2007 01:19 PM To Cornely, David [EMAIL PROTECTED], veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu cc Subject Re: [Veritas-bu] Upgrade to 6.5 or 6.0MP4 6.0 MP5 has two significant bugs that I know of: 1. Compressed catalogs cannot be read when browsing backups to be restored: You have to open a support case and get a new bpdbm binary. 2. NDMP backups fail if you have tuned Netbackup with NUMBER_DATA_BUFFERS. You have to open a support case get a new bptm binary. Neil From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Cornely, David Sent: Friday, October 26, 2007 9:52 AM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Upgrade to 6.5 or 6.0MP4 Well, I?d say got to 6.0 MP5 (not MP4) since it addresses some issues in MP4, specifically things we?ve had issues with. I?m always very hesitant to move to any new software version of any product, be it Netbackup or anything else. But with Netbackup I?ve learned not to touch it until at least MP2 is out ? clearly Symantec, like most software companies, considers time to market more important than addressing all bugs out of the gate so I strongly suggest 6.0MP5 unless there is a feature only available in 6.5 that you absolutely must have? caveat emptor. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 26, 2007 09:10 To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Upgrade to 6.5 or 6.0MP4 Hi there, I am looking for opinions whether or not to go to 6.5 or 6.0MP4 Currently on 5.1MP6/Solaris ? Master/ Solaris, Linux, Windows, Exchange, VM ? Clients/ Flashbackup, BareMetal, Oracle raw partitions, - future options Alex Gerber CISSP, CISA Senior UNIX Systems Administrator Sepracor Inc. p. 508.357.7445 f. 508.357. THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS COMMUNICATION AND ANY ATTACHMENTS HERETO IS CONFIDENTIAL, MAY BE ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE ADDRESSEE(S). IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT AN INTENDED RECIPIENT, OR AN AGENT THEREOF, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY REVIEW, USE, DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION, OR COPYING OF THIS COMMUNICATION OR ANY ATTACHMENT HERETO IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS MESSAGE IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY BY E-MAIL, AND DELETE THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE . ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu == CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message and all attachments transmitted with it may contain legally privileged, proprietary and/or confidential information intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution, duplication or other use of this message and/or its attachments is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message and its attachments. Thank you. == ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Upgrade to 6.5 or 6.0MP4
Don't know - I went from 4.5 FP6 to 5.1 MPsomething till I had enough of that then onto 6.0 MP5. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 26, 2007 10:25 AM To: Conner, Neil Cc: Cornely, David; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Upgrade to 6.5 or 6.0MP4 Are those 2 bugs only in 6.0 MP5 or MP4 as well? I am migrating from Solaris to AIX, and I have to tune the buffer settings on AIX media server to get good throughput. I haven't been able to test NDMP on it yet though. Jared M. Seaton Recovery Administrator Mylan Inc. 304-554-5926 304-685-1389 (Cell) Conner, Neil [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 10/26/2007 01:19 PM To Cornely, David [EMAIL PROTECTED], veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu cc Subject Re: [Veritas-bu] Upgrade to 6.5 or 6.0MP4 6.0 MP5 has two significant bugs that I know of: 1. Compressed catalogs cannot be read when browsing backups to be restored: You have to open a support case and get a new bpdbm binary. 2. NDMP backups fail if you have tuned Netbackup with NUMBER_DATA_BUFFERS. You have to open a support case get a new bptm binary. Neil From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Cornely, David Sent: Friday, October 26, 2007 9:52 AM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Upgrade to 6.5 or 6.0MP4 Well, I'd say got to 6.0 MP5 (not MP4) since it addresses some issues in MP4, specifically things we've had issues with. I'm always very hesitant to move to any new software version of any product, be it Netbackup or anything else. But with Netbackup I've learned not to touch it until at least MP2 is out - clearly Symantec, like most software companies, considers time to market more important than addressing all bugs out of the gate so I strongly suggest 6.0MP5 unless there is a feature only available in 6.5 that you absolutely must have... caveat emptor. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 26, 2007 09:10 To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Upgrade to 6.5 or 6.0MP4 Hi there, I am looking for opinions whether or not to go to 6.5 or 6.0MP4 Currently on 5.1MP6/Solaris - Master/ Solaris, Linux, Windows, Exchange, VM - Clients/ Flashbackup, BareMetal, Oracle raw partitions, - future options Alex Gerber CISSP, CISA Senior UNIX Systems Administrator Sepracor Inc. p. 508.357.7445 f. 508.357. THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS COMMUNICATION AND ANY ATTACHMENTS HERETO IS CONFIDENTIAL, MAY BE ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE ADDRESSEE(S). IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT AN INTENDED RECIPIENT, OR AN AGENT THEREOF, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY REVIEW, USE, DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION, OR COPYING OF THIS COMMUNICATION OR ANY ATTACHMENT HERETO IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS MESSAGE IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY BY E-MAIL, AND DELETE THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE . ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu == CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message and all attachments transmitted with it may contain legally privileged, proprietary and/or confidential information intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution, duplication or other use of this message and/or its attachments is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message and its attachments. Thank you. == ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] how to see whether the device has lock
... and of course you'd use -release to release the SCSI reservation. (I'd say check the man page for details, but they didn't bother to write one for vmdareq, so just do vmdareq -h.) -- gabriel rosenkoetter Radian Group Inc, Unix/Linux/VMware Sysadmin / Backup Recovery [EMAIL PROTECTED], 215 231 1556 _ From: Rosenkoetter, Gabriel Sent: Friday, October 26, 2007 1:51 PM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] how to see whether the device has lock It's unclear whether you're asking about an OS-level SCSI reserve that NetBackup doesn't know about, but assuming SSO and a SCSI reserve that NetBackup actually set, you want /usr/openv/volmgr/bin/vmdareq, like so: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/openv/volmgr/bin [9] vmdareq -display -D P2R0E2-9940b-05 P2R0E2-9940b-05 - RESERVED on Fri Oct 26 12:36:50 2007 phlmaster RESERVED SCAN_HOST UP (Also good, with no arguments, to make sure that your SSO-using [SAN] media servers are registering their drives properly.) Note that that's NBU 4.x/5.x speak. I can't speak to 6.x (yet). -- gabriel rosenkoetter Radian Group Inc, Unix/Linux/VMware Sysadmin / Backup Recovery [EMAIL PROTECTED], 215 231 1556 _ From: Asiye Yigit [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 26, 2007 11:30 AM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] how to see whether the device has lock Hi, Although the drive is empty, It seems as if it is being used master server. Due to that, that drive can not be used by policies. Is there any command to see there is a lock on it?Is there any command to clear the lock to re-use it without stopping netbackup daemons? Regards, Asiye Yigit ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Upgrade to 6.5 or 6.0MP4
I was under the impression, from Symantas sales folks, that 6.5 essentially *was* 6.0 MP5, without any real feature adds. Did that change somewhere along the way? (As it happens, we're planning a hop from 5.1MP5 to 6.5 soon...) -- gabriel rosenkoetter Radian Group Inc, Unix/Linux/VMware Sysadmin / Backup Recovery [EMAIL PROTECTED], 215 231 1556 _ From: Cornely, David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 26, 2007 12:52 PM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Upgrade to 6.5 or 6.0MP4 Well, I'd say got to 6.0 MP5 (not MP4) since it addresses some issues in MP4, specifically things we've had issues with. I'm always very hesitant to move to any new software version of any product, be it Netbackup or anything else. But with Netbackup I've learned not to touch it until at least MP2 is out - clearly Symantec, like most software companies, considers time to market more important than addressing all bugs out of the gate so I strongly suggest 6.0MP5 unless there is a feature only available in 6.5 that you absolutely must have... caveat emptor. _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 26, 2007 09:10 To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Upgrade to 6.5 or 6.0MP4 Hi there, I am looking for opinions whether or not to go to 6.5 or 6.0MP4 Currently on 5.1MP6/Solaris - Master/ Solaris, Linux, Windows, Exchange, VM - Clients/ Flashbackup, BareMetal, Oracle raw partitions, - future options Alex Gerber CISSP, CISA Senior UNIX Systems Administrator Sepracor Inc. p. 508.357.7445 f. 508.357. _ THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS COMMUNICATION AND ANY ATTACHMENTS HERETO IS CONFIDENTIAL, MAY BE ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE ADDRESSEE(S). IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT AN INTENDED RECIPIENT, OR AN AGENT THEREOF, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY REVIEW, USE, DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION, OR COPYING OF THIS COMMUNICATION OR ANY ATTACHMENT HERETO IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS MESSAGE IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY BY E-MAIL, AND DELETE THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE . ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Upgrade to 6.5 or 6.0MP4
6.5 is being consider a new release, however 6.5 is using the same database as 6.x so there is no database merge as with 5.x to 6.x. From what I understand the install is rather painless, and runs thru very much the same way as a MP install did. Symantec has changed the way they are labeling their new release so instead of a 6.5 MP1. We will see 6.5.1. MP5 for 6.0 I believe is the last MP being released. Thanks Dan From: Rosenkoetter, Gabriel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 26, 2007 1:56 PM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Upgrade to 6.5 or 6.0MP4 I was under the impression, from Symantas sales folks, that 6.5 essentially *was* 6.0 MP5, without any real feature adds. Did that change somewhere along the way? (As it happens, we're planning a hop from 5.1MP5 to 6.5 soon...) -- gabriel rosenkoetter Radian Group Inc, Unix/Linux/VMware Sysadmin / Backup Recovery [EMAIL PROTECTED], 215 231 1556 From: Cornely, David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 26, 2007 12:52 PM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Upgrade to 6.5 or 6.0MP4 Well, I'd say got to 6.0 MP5 (not MP4) since it addresses some issues in MP4, specifically things we've had issues with. I'm always very hesitant to move to any new software version of any product, be it Netbackup or anything else. But with Netbackup I've learned not to touch it until at least MP2 is out - clearly Symantec, like most software companies, considers time to market more important than addressing all bugs out of the gate so I strongly suggest 6.0MP5 unless there is a feature only available in 6.5 that you absolutely must have... caveat emptor. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 26, 2007 09:10 To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Upgrade to 6.5 or 6.0MP4 Hi there, I am looking for opinions whether or not to go to 6.5 or 6.0MP4 Currently on 5.1MP6/Solaris - Master/ Solaris, Linux, Windows, Exchange, VM - Clients/ Flashbackup, BareMetal, Oracle raw partitions, - future options Alex Gerber CISSP, CISA Senior UNIX Systems Administrator Sepracor Inc. p. 508.357.7445 f. 508.357. THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS COMMUNICATION AND ANY ATTACHMENTS HERETO IS CONFIDENTIAL, MAY BE ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE ADDRESSEE(S). IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT AN INTENDED RECIPIENT, OR AN AGENT THEREOF, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY REVIEW, USE, DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION, OR COPYING OF THIS COMMUNICATION OR ANY ATTACHMENT HERETO IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS MESSAGE IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY BY E-MAIL, AND DELETE THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE . This message (including any attachments) contains confidential information intended for a specific individual and purpose, and is protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message, or the taking of any action based on it, is strictly prohibited. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] flexible disk option for NBU65
Anyone know much about the flexible disk option? I was curious how the SAN Client and SAN Server modes work. I get that with 65, you can share out a fiber-attached DSSU, assuming you expose your dssu lun(s) to your fc-connected targets. So, can you have one dssu shared out to multiple targets at the same time? IOW, if I have 20 boxes that connect up to my 10TB san volume can they all write to that at the same time? or does NBU have to share it out similar to a SSO tape drive (iow, one at a time). Also, I'm assuming that, like a VTL, you need to license that shareable DSSU per TB like a traditional VTL? Thoughts? Thanks, ~ Robin ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Upgrade to 6.5 or 6.0MP4
Gabe, NetBackup 6.5 is huge feature release, not a Maintenance Pack for NBU 6.0. NBU 6.5 adds things like SAN Client, a new Open Disk API for better support of Storage and VTL's. When PureDisk 6.5 comes out, it will support PureDisk media servers, etc. It is a huge feature release. You should ask for an update from you Symantec Sales Team. Dave David K. Carpe Principal Systems Engineer Symantec Corporation Office: 646.487.6012 Mobile: 908.963.6818 Home Office: 973.940-1805 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rosenkoetter, Gabriel Sent: Friday, October 26, 2007 1:56 PM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Upgrade to 6.5 or 6.0MP4 I was under the impression, from Symantas sales folks, that 6.5 essentially *was* 6.0 MP5, without any real feature adds. Did that change somewhere along the way? (As it happens, we're planning a hop from 5.1MP5 to 6.5 soon...) -- gabriel rosenkoetter Radian Group Inc, Unix/Linux/VMware Sysadmin / Backup Recovery [EMAIL PROTECTED], 215 231 1556 From: Cornely, David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 26, 2007 12:52 PM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Upgrade to 6.5 or 6.0MP4 Well, I'd say got to 6.0 MP5 (not MP4) since it addresses some issues in MP4, specifically things we've had issues with. I'm always very hesitant to move to any new software version of any product, be it Netbackup or anything else. But with Netbackup I've learned not to touch it until at least MP2 is out - clearly Symantec, like most software companies, considers time to market more important than addressing all bugs out of the gate so I strongly suggest 6.0MP5 unless there is a feature only available in 6.5 that you absolutely must have... caveat emptor. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 26, 2007 09:10 To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Upgrade to 6.5 or 6.0MP4 Hi there, I am looking for opinions whether or not to go to 6.5 or 6.0MP4 Currently on 5.1MP6/Solaris - Master/ Solaris, Linux, Windows, Exchange, VM - Clients/ Flashbackup, BareMetal, Oracle raw partitions, - future options Alex Gerber CISSP, CISA Senior UNIX Systems Administrator Sepracor Inc. p. 508.357.7445 f. 508.357. THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS COMMUNICATION AND ANY ATTACHMENTS HERETO IS CONFIDENTIAL, MAY BE ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGED, AND IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE ADDRESSEE(S). IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT AN INTENDED RECIPIENT, OR AN AGENT THEREOF, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY REVIEW, USE, DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION, OR COPYING OF THIS COMMUNICATION OR ANY ATTACHMENT HERETO IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS MESSAGE IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY BY E-MAIL, AND DELETE THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE . ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Veritas-bu Digest, Vol 18, Issue 47
If you have multiple STU create an STUG Thanks, Rockey J. Reed You're not obligated to win. You're obligated to keep trying to do the best you can every day. Marian Wright Edelman -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of WALLEBROEK Bart Sent: Friday, October 26, 2007 3:31 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Veritas-bu Digest, Vol 18, Issue 47 Jack, What happens then when a tape drive attached to the Media Server fails ? All clients backing up to this Media Server will have a failed backup. Or do you select Any Available as option for the Policy storage unit in the policies attributes ? Best Regards, Bart WALLEBROEK ___ 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
