[Veritas-bu] (no subject)
http://rubensmuzio.org/xmlrpc/includes/giftsandsurprises.htm?super.life___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] PureDisk Customers
We're using it to backup about 35 remote servers, some of which have the "millions of small files" issue in spades. Short answer: it may not solve your backup window problem- or it might. Things to keep in mind: you are limited in terms of the number of PO's per job. Each file/folder is a PO, so you'll probably need some hefty include/exclude lists to make sure you are below the limit (varies by version- check the manual for your version). A lot of your performance with PD is based on the client. I have a 1.25 TB client that does 6 million + files per night. Takes 8-10 hours over a 1 GB LAN link to a local PD sever, even with only 8GB of changes. This is an older server with a 3ghz Xeon processor and 4 GB RAM. Disk controller is an HP SA6400 with 192 Mb set to 50/50 R/W. A more powerful client would definitely improve your performance. If you want to play around with it, you can download a pre-packaged VM with a built-in trial key to see if it works for you. I highly recommend a long chat with Symantec techincal types too- I haven't used the VM or version 6.6, but at least on the older versions the installs are not for the faint of heart. Tom --- On Fri, 11/20/09, Klebba, Don wrote: > From: Klebba, Don > Subject: [Veritas-bu] PureDisk Customers > To: "veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu" > Date: Friday, November 20, 2009, 7:47 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I was wondering if anyone is using > Pure Disk and in what > capacity. We have some systems that have millions of small > files, and > > Thought that maybe backing these > servers up using Pure Disk > what help solve some of our time window issues. > > > > Thanks > > > > Don > Klebba > > Quicken Loans > > Storage Management Team > > donkle...@quickenloans.com > > > phone: > (734)805-7791 > > > > > > > > > > -Inline Attachment Follows- > > ___ > 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] Exchange 2003 Cluster - Backup Area Network
Per Symantec's website: http://support.veritas.com/docs/276349 Status 69 or Status 71: * Confirm the directives are correct for the version of Exchange. For Exchange 5.5, the directives are Microsoft Exchange Server:\Information Store and Microsoft Exchange Server:\Directory. For Exchange 2000/2003 server is Microsoft Information Store:\* or Microsoft Information Store:\. Please note that for the files list Microsoft Information Store:\* to work correctly, Allow multiple data streams must be enabled. * Confirm that the servers list correctly lists the Exchange server name. Do not use a NetBackup name, the name of a backup interface, or a fully qualified domain name. If the server is listed in the Exchange administrative console as Exchange_server_1, confirm that is how it is listed in the policy. If the policy shows Exchange_server_1_backup or Exchange_server_1.domain.com, the backups will fail. * If the backup makes use of the directive NEW_STREAM, be sure the Allow multiple data streams option is selected. Tom --- DLew97 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi - > > I am trying to backup my exchange 2003 cluster > through my backup area > network. I had created a ip address resource with a > Backup Area Address for > the cluster. The backup area network card has been > configured as well. I > have configured the Netbackup agent to reflect the > changes and i am able to > ping from the master/media servers. Am I missing > something else? My backups > are failing with a status 69. > > -- > DLew97 > > ___ > Veritas-bu maillist - > Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu > http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu > __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] DFS tracking
We have a large environment with a few hundred Wintel servers. Our server admins are introducing DFS into this, but everyone is concerned about keeping track of the relationship between DFS shares and physical location for (among other things) Netbackup purposes- making sure we can find the data for a restore without jumping through a bunch of hoops. I'm curious as to how anyone else out there is dealing with this issue. Are there any tips, tools or stories people would like to share about how you are dealing with this issue? Tom __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] clients in hosts files and forcing NICs to FULL
We use DNS for everything. If you want a new server to work correctly, then the production side needs to be in DNS- just make the backup DNS part of the process for whoever does the production net. As for Auto vs Hardcoded- we have issues on 100Mb going to half-duplex when those clients when they are set to Auto, so those have to be hard-coded. For Gig clients, Auto works fine. People like to have one rule though- so we tell them "hard-code" just to make sure it always works. But again- this process is the same for both production and backup networks, so it makes it much easier for the sysadmins to keep straight. Tom --- "Adams, Dwayne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello, > > > > I have managed a few backup environments and always > put the backup > servers in the hosts file of the clients and the > clients in the backup > server's hosts file. I always like to control name > resolution myself. > Do most backup administrator do that or am I a relic > from the past? > Also, do most backup admins use AUTO negotiate or > set the switch port > and the host to FULL DUPLEX? My practices are being > questioned and I > would like to check to see if what I am doing is in > line with what most > backup admins are doing. > > > > > > Thanks in advance, > > > > Dwayne Adams > > > ___ > Veritas-bu maillist - > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu > We won't tell. Get more on shows you hate to love (and love to hate): Yahoo! TV's Guilty Pleasures list. http://tv.yahoo.com/collections/265 ___ Veritas-bu maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Somewhat OT: Copying a Windows XP hard disk with NBU
I should add: This is a fairly advanced process to pull off, so if you aren't an expert in Windows- leave it to someone who is. On the upside- if it doesn't work, you still have a backup and the hard drive! Tom Burrell --- Jeff Lightner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Can it be done? > > Situation: > Windows XP Pro laptop with NTFS partitions on 20 GB > hard drive. > Would like to replace 20 GB with 60 GB drive and > have all original > applications, documents etc... transferred. > > Problem: > Windows Admins (I'm a UNIX admin) attempted to > "Ghost" the system but > apparently couldn't due to the NTFS. Some Googling > about Ghost and > NTFS does seem to indicate there are issues doing > that but I don't know > enough about "Ghost" to speak intelligently on that. > > Possible Solution: > Backup the 20 GB drive using NBU 5.1. > Install the 60 GB drive and let them do fresh XP Pro > install. > Install the NBU client. > Restore the backup from the 20 GB to the 60 GB. > > It seems this might cause issues due to sizes etc... > that may be stored > in system config files. I'm wondering if the above > would work or if it > would fail miserably due to this or other things I > don't know about in > Windows. I know enough about Windows to be > dangerous but not enough to > insure all the registry and other information is > correct for the 60 GB > drive. > > If I couldn't do a full restore without mucking up > the config is there > any suggestion as to partial restores that would > bring in my > applications without having to reinstall each of > them? > > ___ > Veritas-bu maillist - > Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu > http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu > Need Mail bonding? Go to the Yahoo! Mail Q&A for great tips from Yahoo! Answers users. http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396546091 ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Somewhat OT: Copying a Windows XP hard disk with NBU
Jeff- we have a trick we use for servers in lieu of BMR that might work for you- but you need to be comfortable with editing the boot.ini file to make this work, and that can be confusing if you don't know the code. Make a full backup with "all_local_drives" Replace the disk, install WinXP as usual EXCEPT: do not put it in the "c:\Windows" directory- put it in "c:\Win2" or something else. Then install the NBU client to c:\NBU, and restore the entire backup to the C drive. Change the Boot.ini file to point to the restored version of Windows in the C:\windows directory Boot it up, remove the extra directories (c:\win2 and c:\nbu) as well as the now bogus entry in the boot.ini file and go on your merry way! Just make sure you make NO OTHER CHANGES to the system besides the hard drive. Tom Burrell --- Jeff Lightner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Can it be done? > > Situation: > Windows XP Pro laptop with NTFS partitions on 20 GB > hard drive. > Would like to replace 20 GB with 60 GB drive and > have all original > applications, documents etc... transferred. > > Problem: > Windows Admins (I'm a UNIX admin) attempted to > "Ghost" the system but > apparently couldn't due to the NTFS. Some Googling > about Ghost and > NTFS does seem to indicate there are issues doing > that but I don't know > enough about "Ghost" to speak intelligently on that. > > Possible Solution: > Backup the 20 GB drive using NBU 5.1. > Install the 60 GB drive and let them do fresh XP Pro > install. > Install the NBU client. > Restore the backup from the 20 GB to the 60 GB. > > It seems this might cause issues due to sizes etc... > that may be stored > in system config files. I'm wondering if the above > would work or if it > would fail miserably due to this or other things I > don't know about in > Windows. I know enough about Windows to be > dangerous but not enough to > insure all the registry and other information is > correct for the 60 GB > drive. > > If I couldn't do a full restore without mucking up > the config is there > any suggestion as to partial restores that would > bring in my > applications without having to reinstall each of > them? > > ___ > Veritas-bu maillist - > Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu > http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu > Never miss an email again! Yahoo! Toolbar alerts you the instant new Mail arrives. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/toolbar/features/mail/ ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] DataDomain and Netbackup
Where do I start? What kind of compression do you see? How does the performance compare to tape/other disk in your environment? Are you using an appliance, or a gateway unit? If a gateway, what do you have behind it for disk? Do you replicate between units? DR or Remote Office backup? How does the replication do on bandwidth? How has the support experience been for you? How is the reliability in your opinion? That should start you off. I'll stop and take a breath now. Tom Burrell --- Justin Piszcz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I use DDR units on a daily basis and have tested > their VTL option, what > are your questions? > > On Mon, 2 Apr 2007, Tom Burrell wrote: > > > Anyone out there have some experiences they would > like > > to share using DataDomain appliances as Disk > > Storage/Staging units behind Netbackup? Esp. in a > DR > > scenario (replicating between sites)? > > > > We are considering a number of options, and at > least > > on paper this one looks pretty interesting and I'm > > hearing good anecdotal evidence locally. Plans > are > > being formed for a proof-of-concept on this, but I > was > > wondering if anyone else has tried this route > > recently. > > > > Tom Burrell > > > > > > > > > > > Now that's room service! Choose from over 150,000 > hotels > > in 45,000 destinations on Yahoo! Travel to find > your fit. > > http://farechase.yahoo.com/promo-generic-14795097 > > ___ > > Veritas-bu maillist - > Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu > > > http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu > > > TV dinner still cooling? Check out "Tonight's Picks" on Yahoo! TV. http://tv.yahoo.com/ ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] DataDomain and Netbackup
Anyone out there have some experiences they would like to share using DataDomain appliances as Disk Storage/Staging units behind Netbackup? Esp. in a DR scenario (replicating between sites)? We are considering a number of options, and at least on paper this one looks pretty interesting and I'm hearing good anecdotal evidence locally. Plans are being formed for a proof-of-concept on this, but I was wondering if anyone else has tried this route recently. Tom Burrell Now that's room service! Choose from over 150,000 hotels in 45,000 destinations on Yahoo! Travel to find your fit. http://farechase.yahoo.com/promo-generic-14795097 ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] SSO and Multiplexing Question
Jason, You're conclusion is correct as to the effect of disabling multiplexing, but I question your logic for doing so. Disabling multplexing does not "maximize drive throughput" during a backup. That is what Multiplexing is actually set up to do. I'm not a big numbers guy, so I'll let others step through the math, but I can tell you in my real-world experience that in a properly configured Netbackup system, multiplexing to tape is not going to slow you down- it will actually help especially if you look at the environment as a whole. The only thing it buys you really is less fragmentation on the tape. If that's important then fair enough- but try and shim some Disk Staging in there if you can- the staged data can be written to the tape faster than the raw data from the client (in most cases). Tom Burrell --- "Ellis, Jason" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If I have maximum multiplexing set to 8 on one > storage unit A, and 1 on > another storage unit B that are sharing drives in > SSO, then if a job > starts to run using storage unit B will it only run > one stream to the > drive until that job has been completed? > > > > Basically I want to prevent multiplexing to drives > in SSO only from one > storage unit to maximize drive throughput for a > specific job. > > > > Jason Ellis > Technical Consultant, Data Protection Team > IndyMac Bank, La Mirada Datacenter > Phone: (714) 520-3414 > Mobile: (714) 889-8734 > > > > > ___ > Veritas-bu maillist - > Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu > http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu > Looking for earth-friendly autos? Browse Top Cars by "Green Rating" at Yahoo! Autos' Green Center. http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/ ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Create a private backup LAN
Ana, I would not make the virtual server dependent on the backup IP resource. In fact, I would make sure that the backup IP and NIC do not cause the cluster group to fail over. This gives you the ability to make changes on the backup net without impacting your production side, and protects your production applications from backup net problems- which are serious, but not something that should take out the e-mail system. I would also register this net with DNS- this allows you to use FQDN's for your backup hosts that make life easier on restores. For example: host1.public.com as the "front side" name, with host1.backup.com as the "backside" name. This makes the restore process less confusing- and restores are when you really want everything as easy as possible. You may have to add routes on your hosts to make everything work, but in the end it's not that hard to manage. This is how we have our environment and it works very well. Tom Burrell --- Ana Alltari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi all, > > I am in a proccess of creating a private LAN for our > Veritas netbackup > solution. > > our environmet is as following: > > Master server --Enterprise Netbackup 6.0 on a > win2k3 platform > 3 Media Servers-- Netbackup 6.0 on a win 2k3 > platform. > > our initial backup clients to be switched on private > lan are: > > MCS 2 node clustered exhange servers (exch2003 > sp1/win2k3 Sp1) > > MCS 2 node clustered file servers (win2k3 Sp1) > > on each of cluster nodes i have added an extra > ethernet, and what i was > thinking is to create an extra IP resource dependend > on the settings of > these ethernet cards. > > 1) for the exchange server under the MS exchange > virlual server. > > 2) for the file server under the virtual file > server. > > My questions for the correct design are: > > -the virtual server name should be depended on this > new created IP resorce > or just the Exchange System Attendet? > -should this IP resourse be registered in our > internal DNS? > > -The backup client should be called trough this > Private IP or through its > DNS name? > (as it might end with 2 different IP registered for > the same HOST A) > > Also a requirement for us is that the communication > between the Master and > media servers needs to be performed via Public LAN. > > i would kindly appriciate any suggestion and best > practise. > Thank you. > > Best Regards, > > Ana Alltari > IT Specialist > > ___ > Veritas-bu maillist - > Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu > http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu > __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Quick question about SQL Agent
Jason- Short answer: no. The SQL agent provides connectivity to the SQL database, but does not change the fundamental architecture of Netbackup nor how the data moves: you still need a media server (of some flavor) to provide the backup target- be it disk or tape. This is apparently coming in 6.5 with the ability to write to disk units only from SAN clients Tom Burrell --- "Ellis, Jason" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >From my understanding, using the SQL agent means > that the backup data is > traveling over the network. You could, in theory, > make each SQL server a > media server and hang a couple of tape drives off > them using SSO. But by > default a SQL agent is a network client. > > > > My question, is there a way to use the SQL agent to > backup SQL databases > (without making each SQL server a media server) that > does not go across > the network? > > > > Jason Ellis > Technical Consultant, Data Protection Team > IndyMac Bank, La Mirada Datacenter > Phone: (714) 520-3414 > Mobile: (714) 889-8734 > > > > > ___ > Veritas-bu maillist - > Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu > http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu > __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] where is MP4? ...waiting for MP5
Can't speak to MP5, but I can say that I believe MP4 WILL be out, and I highly recommend it! As one of my co-workers has already posted here, we have a pre-release version of MP4. While it's certainly not perfect (not fully through QA), it has fixed a number of serious issues for us. I don't know about your issues, but it's been a godsend for us! We've had the Beta for more than a week, so look for it soon! Tom Burrell --- smpt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I can see more and more tecnotes referring to MP5 > and not to MP4 (this is going back to the release > date of MP3). MP5 is supposed to be out at Q1 2007. > I think that there is no space for MP4. > Im sour that MP4 will not fix anything big, if they > publish it. > ___ > Veritas-bu maillist - > Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu > http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu > We have the perfect Group for you. Check out the handy changes to Yahoo! Groups (http://groups.yahoo.com) ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] 64 Bit Client
Daniel, The x64 client is for Opteron (AMD) systems. To install on an Itanium, you need the IA64 client. Look for the version that has IA64 in the name of the file in place of the "X64" you have now. Tom Burrell --- "Jimenez, Daniel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hey guys > > > > I need to install a 64 bit client on a Windows > server 2003, Enterprise > Edition 64 bit Itanium based system. I attempted to > install the client > located at > http://esoftware.veritas.com/CD/MTV/Q192698.NB.WinX64.60MP2.exe.gz > but > receive the following when attempting to install the > client: > > > > The image file setup.exe is valid, but is for a > machine type other than > the current machine. Any help would be appreciated, > thanks. > > > > Other Info: > > 5.2.3790 Service pack 1 build 3790 > > > > Daniel > > > > > ___ > Veritas-bu maillist - > Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu > http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu > __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Keeping tape mounted between backups
Michael, I would suggest that a better option might be a DSSU for this purpose- you get no mount/unmout time, typically faster throughput for both backups and restores, and you can control how often the DSSU destages to tape. Tom Burrell [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- "Sponsler, Michael" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > All, > Is there a way to have netbackup keep the tape in > drive of a robotic > library? I'm doing hourly backups of the Oracle > Archive Log, and the > tape gets unmounted and put back into it's slot > after the backup is > completed. Is there a way to tell netbackup to keep > the tape in the > drive until the tape is full? We did that with > Legato, and now the we > have moved to netbackup we are concerned about the > wear and tear on the > tape drive. Since it's constantly mounting and > unmounting the same > tape. > > -- > Mike Sponsler > Northrop Grumman > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > ___ > Veritas-bu maillist - > Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu > http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu > __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] re: Clustered Exchange Servers
We just use the standard Exchange client- back up mail stores by virtual server rather than physical server, and it works great. Tom Burrell __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
