Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.0 Catalog size compared to 5.1
As far as I know the image format has not change since it went binary in 4.5. So the /image directory would be about the same regardless of which version you use. -- Jerry Vochteloo w: +61-2-8220-7043, m: +61 408 206 748 The opinions stated here are mine and do not necessarily represent those of Symantec Corp -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Carl Mathews Sent: Wednesday, 31 January 2007 3:30 AM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.0 Catalog size compared to 5.1 Would logs be included in the catalog backup? I guess that could help explain the growth in catalog size from 17GB to a conservative estimate of 500GB. Surely growth of the catalog by 3000% would be written in RED in the upgrade manual. One of the biggest applications here is E-mail which has millions and millions of files. There are also plenty of databases. So probably an average mix of applications get a backup. I got to believe the estimate is inflated unless another data center has experienced so much catalog growth in the Netbackup 6.0 conversion. Carl Mathews University of Arkansas Are you sure it's not the logs? There is another directory full of logs and they can be *huge*. .../Ed -- Ed Wilts, Mounds View, MN, USA mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2007 19:53:22 -0600 From: Ed Wilts [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.0 catalog size To: Darren Dunham [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed On 1/29/2007 10:57 AM, Darren Dunham wrote: That said, my 6.0 machine appears to be using significantly more space for catalogs than my 5.1 machine did on roughly the same backups. I don't have exact figures because the data under backup has grown and I haven't tried to calculate anything, but I'm sure it's at least 30% bigger, maybe more. The Tuning Guide says that the catalog can be 1% or 2% (or higher) of the total data being tracked. The catalog size for Netbackup 5.1 is 17 GB. 1 % of the total data is 500 GB. Does the catalog really grow that much or more when moving to Netbackup 6.0? Thanks ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup - 2 drives doing backups in the same time.
Max jobs per policy is also a favourite. -- Jerry Vochteloo w: +61-2-8220-7043, m: +61 408 206 748 The opinions stated here are mine and do not necessarily represent those of Symantec Corp -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Justin Piszcz Sent: Monday, 22 January 2007 10:52 AM To: felipe intaasqui Cc: Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup - 2 drives doing backups in the same time. On Sun, 21 Jan 2007, felipe intaasqui wrote: Hello First, i will explain how my enviroment is configured. I have a robot, model L20, that is connected to a Solartis 8 that is master, media and client (i doing this for tests), my robot has 2 drives, both of the same density and model. My problem is, i want that each one of this 2 drives execute one backup of different polices simultaneously. Things that i configured: I have one storage unit, configured with maximum concurrent drives used for backup seted for 2. All drives and robots are configured. and the volumes and polices are created. in the host properties Master server i set up the option maximum job per client with the value 2. When i tried to to a manual backup with the polices in the same time, both started in the same time, but when it reach the mounting tape fase, the second drive only mount the tape when the first backup is finished. Is this possible to be done ? Am i forgeting something ? Is there an easy way to do this ? thanks in advance Felipe _ Insta-le agora o Windows Live Messenger! http://get.live.com/messenger/overview ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu There are 3-4 places you need to check, but the next one is multiplexing, do you have multiplexing enabled on your storage units? Do you have it enabled in your policies? Do you have the maximum number of jobs 5-10 in the master config? Justin. ___ 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] Tar Write Errors and Tape Consumption
After I configure drives I tend to use robtest to see if I have them right m s1 d1 unload d1 m d1 d2 unload d2 etc m dx s1 The move moves the tape into what the robots thinks is drive 1 the unload unloads what is configured to be drive one, if there is a mismatch you find it then (ie it will tell you there is no tape in the drive. Cheers -- Jerry Vochteloo w: +61-2-8220-7043, m: +61 408 206 748 The opinions stated here are mine and do not necessarily represent those of Symantec Corp -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Keating Sent: Friday, 27 October 2006 3:46 AM To: Dave Brown; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Tar Write Errors and Tape Consumption OddI've had similar misconfigurations, thanks to autoconf/configwizard, and what I experienced, was a tape getting loaded into a drive,the drive going DOWN, then another tape in another drive, that drivegoing DOWN, repeatedly untill all drive were down, but no tapes wereused. Paul -- -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave Brown Sent: October 26, 2006 1:41 PM To: Brooks, Jason; Hindle, Greg; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Tar Write Errors and Tape Consumption I had this happen to me when my drives were mismatched on the robot. I had a robot with 4 drives and what the robot called drives 0,1,2,3 were actually configured in NB as 0,3,2,1. When tape went into NB drive 3, it was actually in robot drive 1. I confused NB and used all of my tapes. I had to call support to figure this out. Do not know if this is your issue. La version française suit le texte anglais. This email may contain privileged and/or confidential information, and the Bank ofCanada does not waive any related rights. Any distribution, use, or copying of thisemail or the information it contains by other than the intended recipient isunauthorized. If you received this email in error please delete it immediately fromyour 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 unepersonne autre que le ou les destinataires désignés est interdite. Si vous recevezce courriel par erreur, veuillez le supprimer immédiatement et envoyer sans délai àl'expéditeur un message électronique pour l'aviser que vous avez éliminé de votreordinateur toute copie du courriel reçu. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] (191) no image succesfully processed
The 191 is generic. If you look at the job details you should be able to see the underlying error, 96 84 etc etc Cheers --Jerry Vochteloow: +61-2-8220-7043, m: +61 408 206 748The opinions stated here are mine and do not necessarily represent those ofSymantec Corp From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of chodhetzSent: Wednesday, 20 September 2006 5:57 PMTo: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.eduSubject: [Veritas-bu] (191) no image succesfully processed Dear all,.I'm using NBU 5.1 MP3 master server hpux 11.11 and as DSSU for solaris oracle backup version 5.0, when duplicate process perform from DSSU to tape we faced problem (191) no image succesfully processed and all duplicates are error, any body can help ???Thanx BeforeChodhetz New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 1GB free storage! ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] New veritas installation - jobs do not start inparallel, all else queueing
Title: New veritas installation - jobs do not start in parallel, all else queueing There are are multiple settings that control the number of jobs that run at the same time (a little annoying at first, but great for flexibility in complex environments) Multiplexing: need to set the max mpxin both the storage unit and the schedule Multistreaming: need to set allow multiple datastreams in the policy attributes and (the one I would bet you don't have set currently :) Host properties- master server - global netbackup attributes - max jobs per client (need to be set greater then one) if you do all these and it still doesn't work (stop and restart nbu) and try again, if it still doesn't work check that max jobs this client hasn't been set for that particular client. hth j --Jerry Vochteloow: +61-2-8220-7043, m: +61 408 206 748The opinions stated here are mine and do not necessarily represent those ofSymantec Corp From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Wessam AlySent: Saturday, 9 September 2006 10:18 PMTo: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.eduSubject: [Veritas-bu] New veritas installation - jobs do not start inparallel, all else queueing Hey all, I just started a new instakllation of Veritas Netbackup Entreprise 5.1 MP4. I have 2 LTO3 drives in an STK L500 library. The 2-drive storage unit is configured for MPX 3 and with no max frag limit. Whenever I start a new job (configured for multiple streams), Always only one stream starts writing to one drive, the the rest of jobs are idle. The other drive is sitting idle. The job is configured with 3 or more streams. What could be the problem ? Thanks, Wessam Aly Senior UNIX Storage Systems Admin. ***IMPORTANTConfidentiality: This e-mail communication and any attachments thereto contain information which is confidential and are intended only for the use of the individuals or entities named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking any action in reliance on the contents of these documents is strictly prohibited and may be illegal. Please notify us of your receipt of this e-mail in error and delete the e-mail and any copies of it.Monitoring/Viruses: Mobinil may monitor all incoming outgoing e-mails in line with current legislation. Although we have taken steps to ensure that this e-mail and attachments are free from any Virus, we advise that in keeping with good computing practice the recipient should ensure they are actually virus free.The Egyptian Company for Mobile Services (Mobinil) www.mobinil.com*** smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing problem
These things will determine if multiple jobs run Multiplexing in the storage unit Multiplexing in the schedule Max jobs/clients (global) set to more then one (if you are also multistreaming) Max jobs this client Max jobs per policy Number of drives in STU Max of concurrent drives used for backup Very configurable, right :) If any of these are set to one, then you won't get multiple jobs. Btw if you do make changes, make sure that bpsched (if you are running 5.x) has died before running them again Cheers -- Jerry Vochteloo w: +61-2-8220-7043, m: +61 408 206 748 The opinions stated here are mine and do not necessarily represent those of Symantec Corp -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Asiye Yigit Sent: Thursday, 6 July 2006 11:18 PM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing problem Hi All, I have a problem. Even though I have set all requirements for multiplexing, the items on my backup selection list are entering in queue. I would expect that they will be running simultaneously. What am I missing? Regards, Asiye ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Windows File Server NEW STREAM syntax
yeah, make sure that Allow multiple data streams is set in the policy. Will give you said error if you don't --Jerry Vochteloow: +61-2-8220-7043, m: +61 408 206 748The opinions stated here are mine and do not necessarily represent those ofSymantec Corp From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Wednesday, 21 June 2006 3:19 AMTo: Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.eduSubject: [Veritas-bu] Windows File Server "NEW STREAM" syntax All, I have started migrating data over to a Win2k3 R2 file server and I am experiencing Error 41's (go figure) and so I wanted to breakout the different volumes into streams but I get and Error 69, that states invalid file specification (missing ':'): NEW_STREAM this is what I have in my policy: NEW_STREAM E:\Facil E:\IT E:\Public E:\System Volume Information NEW_STREAM F:\Home F:\TempSpace F:\Utils Shadow Copy Components:\ Can someone point me in the right direction? Any help would be appreciated. Regards, Steve BallySystems EngineerRadiSys Corporationwww.radisys.com[EMAIL PROTECTED]Desk: 503-615-1207 Cell: 503-970-6201This 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. smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
