Re: [Veritas-bu] Error nbjm NBU status: 800, EMM status: Disk volume is down resource request failed (800)
I'm getting the same error as judy. Disk unit is down. I was also referring to NBU master. I think the issue is EMM needs to rescan the storage units on the media server after a fail over. I'm not sure if it's a app cluster issue or just a general problem with disk storage units. This is my first instance of using an netbackup app cluster so I'm still working out the kinks. I open up a call with Symantec about this but not getting anywhere with it. From: Jeff Lightner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, November 14, 2008 11:20 AM To: Smithers, Mike; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] Error nbjm NBU status: 800, EMM status: Disk volume is down resource request failed (800) You get the error Judy posted or the one I posted? By master you mean the NBU master? From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Smithers, Mike Sent: Friday, November 14, 2008 11:05 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'; VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Error nbjm NBU status: 800, EMM status: Disk volume is down resource request failed (800) I get this error every now and then with our exchange environment. We get it when we fail over the exchange cluster to another node. I set the disk storage units on the exchange server as an app cluster and the disks as a resource in windows. The disks fails over fine and the app cluster points to the right media server but it still fails on 800. Very annoying only way I can get it working is by recycling the master server. Recycling the netbackup service on the exchange server does not good. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, November 14, 2008 10:54 AM To: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Error nbjm NBU status: 800, EMM status: Disk volume is down resource request failed (800) Wow I have been working on 800's and had a bunch last night. Don't know if this the same but let me tell you what I know. I had a bunch of jobs work if the master/media server did them Anything done by my other media server or my san media server failed with 800 They are trying to tell me it is because I have the san disk drives on my master server on the same FC card as my san tape drives. I could not get that fixed the same day, but I bounced all the media servers, then bounced the services on the master again, and restarted an 800 failure and it worked for 2 days. Then I had 800's again last night. I am putting in a third FC card today and setting the disk drives on 2 of the fc cards and the tape drives will be on the third, then I can see if I have any more issues. Master/media AIX 5.3.6 Media AIX 5.3.6 San Media windows 2003 Sane Media windows 2003 Netbackup 6.5.2a What pointed us to this is the following errors found in the syslog syslog.debug:Jun 18 09:29:13 kwibsp03 daemon:info tldcd[520196]: tldcd.c.2699, n ewfd = INVALID_SOCKET, newfd=-1, timersig=1, error=4, EINTR=4, selectret=-1 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Lightner Sent: Friday, November 14, 2008 9:36 AM To: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Error nbjm NBU status: 800,EMM status: Disk volume is down resource request failed (800) We saw this morning on a backup of MS-Exchange to Data Domain. I see a prior question about this to a Falcon store with no answer. The Data Domain volume isn't "down" but is running over 90%. Would we see this message if the intended backup wouldn't fit in the remaining space of the DD? Or is this somehow a complaint about the volume on the Exchange server itself? -- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail may contain privileged or confidential information and is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the contents of this information is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please reply immediately to the sender that you have received the message in error, and delete it. Thank you. -- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Error nbjm NBU status: 800, EMM status: Disk volume is down resource request failed (800)
I get this error every now and then with our exchange environment. We get it when we fail over the exchange cluster to another node. I set the disk storage units on the exchange server as an app cluster and the disks as a resource in windows. The disks fails over fine and the app cluster points to the right media server but it still fails on 800. Very annoying only way I can get it working is by recycling the master server. Recycling the netbackup service on the exchange server does not good. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, November 14, 2008 10:54 AM To: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Error nbjm NBU status: 800, EMM status: Disk volume is down resource request failed (800) Wow I have been working on 800's and had a bunch last night. Don't know if this the same but let me tell you what I know. I had a bunch of jobs work if the master/media server did them Anything done by my other media server or my san media server failed with 800 They are trying to tell me it is because I have the san disk drives on my master server on the same FC card as my san tape drives. I could not get that fixed the same day, but I bounced all the media servers, then bounced the services on the master again, and restarted an 800 failure and it worked for 2 days. Then I had 800's again last night. I am putting in a third FC card today and setting the disk drives on 2 of the fc cards and the tape drives will be on the third, then I can see if I have any more issues. Master/media AIX 5.3.6 Media AIX 5.3.6 San Media windows 2003 Sane Media windows 2003 Netbackup 6.5.2a What pointed us to this is the following errors found in the syslog syslog.debug:Jun 18 09:29:13 kwibsp03 daemon:info tldcd[520196]: tldcd.c.2699, n ewfd = INVALID_SOCKET, newfd=-1, timersig=1, error=4, EINTR=4, selectret=-1 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Lightner Sent: Friday, November 14, 2008 9:36 AM To: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Error nbjm NBU status: 800,EMM status: Disk volume is down resource request failed (800) We saw this morning on a backup of MS-Exchange to Data Domain. I see a prior question about this to a Falcon store with no answer. The Data Domain volume isn't "down" but is running over 90%. Would we see this message if the intended backup wouldn't fit in the remaining space of the DD? Or is this somehow a complaint about the volume on the Exchange server itself? -- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail may contain privileged or confidential information and is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the contents of this information is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please reply immediately to the sender that you have received the message in error, and delete it. Thank you. -- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Exchange 2007 with CCR - Passive Node Backup
Status 130 is a very generic error with snaps with exchange. It could be
multiple issues. You will have to dive into the VSS logs or look into VSS
provider logs for your storage array.
Are you doing IR snaps as well. Also what storage array are you using.
Thanks Mike
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rosenkoetter,
Gabriel
Sent: Friday, September 26, 2008 1:49 PM
To: 'Michitsch, John'; VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Exchange 2007 with CCR - Passive Node Backup
I haven't seen exactly that ("Error attempting to find volumes to snap"), but
I've just slogged through a variety of 130 errors to get to a working
configuration.
Are your replicas healthy in the Exchange console?
Did you set the HKLM\System\CCS\Services\MSExchangeIS\ParametersSystem\Enable
Remote Streaming Backup registry key, as explained at
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa580485(EXCHG.80).aspx?
Did you restart the clustered mailbox server after setting the registry key (as
is not mentioned at that link but is mentioned in the Exchange help topic)? You
do that in the Exchange Management Shell like this:
Stop-ClusteredMailboxServer -StopReason "Enable Remote Streaming
Backup" -Confirm:$False
Start-ClusteredMailboxServer
The client-side log you want to be looking at is bpfis, and you'll want to look
at it both on the active and on the passive node. While testing, I recommend
that you force backups to the passive node (they'll fail with a 130 if it's
unavailable), but you probably want to permit falling back to the active node
once you're running live.
--
gabriel rosenkoetter
Radian Group Inc, Unix/Linux/VMware Sysadmin / Backup & Recovery
[EMAIL PROTECTED], 215 231 1556
-Original Message-
From: Michitsch, John [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 26, 2008 10:43 AM
To: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Exchange 2007 with CCR - Passive Node Backup
Has anyone seen these errors when trying an Exchange 2007 with CCR - Passive
Node Backup? The client is the Exchange cluster virtual name.
9/26/2008 10:40:11 AM - begin Create Snapshot
9/26/2008 10:40:29 AM - Critical bpbrm(pid=404) from client ent-mocexcmb10: FTL
- snapshot preparation failed - Error attempting to find volumes to snap.,
status 130
9/26/2008 10:40:29 AM - Critical bpbrm(pid=404) from client ent-mocexcmb10: FTL
- snapshot preparation failed, status 130
9/26/2008 10:40:37 AM - end Create Snapshot; elapsed time: 00:00:26
9/26/2008 10:40:39 AM - end writing
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of oersted
Sent: 24 September, 2008 5:42 PM
To: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: [Veritas-bu] Exchange 2007 with CCR - Passive Node Backup
this is spot on
Rosenkoetter, Gabriel wrote:
> You shouldn't be specifying either the active or passive node name as a
> client, you should be specifying the cluster's virtual name as a client.
>
> Also, note that you must run the NetBackup Client Service as an AD-level (not
> local) account that has local admin access on each server and admin access to
> the Exchange cluster for LCR/CCR snapshot backups. Running the client as
> LocalSystem will not work. (The documentation's a bit hazy on this point.
> It's clear that that's necessary for individual mailbox backups, it's not so
> clear that it's required for the cluster backups, but it makes sense when you
> think about it: the Exchange cluster isn't logically attached to either node,
> so neither node's LocalSystem has sufficient permissions.)
>
> --
> gabriel rosenkoetter
> Radian Group Inc, Unix/Linux/VMware Sysadmin / Backup & Recovery
> gabriel.rosenkoetter < at > radian.biz, 215 231 1556
>
> From: Scheef Jr, Ed E. [mailto:CXScheef < at > tecoenergy.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 3:36 PM
> To: veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
> Subject: [Veritas-bu] Exchange 2007 with CCR - Passive Node Backup
>
>
>
>
> Folks,
>
> We're running Netbackup 6.5.2.
>
> We're just now setting up a Netbackup Policy for Exchange 2007 running in a
> CCR cluster.
> The backup has been defined to "backup the passive node first, but if not
> available, backup
> the active node".
>
> The question I have is client definition in the Snapshot policy (within
> Exchange Policy) required
> to backup the Exchange database:
>
> When we put both physical CCR cluster node names in the policy's client list,
> it starts backups
> for both nodes, and looks like it does "snapshots" for both nodes, when only
> the "passive node"
> should be snapshotting, and getting backed up. Why is that happening ??
> Anybody have a
> "passive node" Exchange backup set up and working ???
>
> An obvious solution would be to take the "active" node server out of the
> policy's client list, but
> then if a failover occurred , and the "passive" node switched to what is now
> the "active" node,
> would the
Re: [Veritas-bu] Top 20 (or so) misunderstood things about NBU
Synthetic backups. Same great taste but half the calories -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Curtis Preston Sent: Monday, March 31, 2008 5:49 PM To: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Top 20 (or so) misunderstood things about NBU Hey there, folks! I'm working very hard on my next book, which will have some product-specific information in it. I'm covering multiple products, so I won't go TOO deep on individual products, but I'd like to do my best to cover misunderstood or frequently asked topics for each major product. I figured that no one would know better than this list which topics people tend to get confused. What topics do you think should go on that list? (I've got my personal preferences, but I don't want to prejudice your thoughts.) What are the top 5/20/30 things about NBU that you think people get wrong? TIA --- W. Curtis Preston Backup Blog @ www.backupcentral.com VP Data Protection, GlassHouse Technologies ___ 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
