[Veritas-bu] REQUIRED_INTERFACE, anyone using private backup networks?
In my experience, if you do it correctly, you won't need the "REQUIRED_INTERFACE" setting. It's caused me more problems then it has fixed. I'm sure there are some specific areas were you'll need it, but I'd suspect your overall environment could be designed better in those cases. +-- |This was sent by spal...@spaldam.com via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com. +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Using NetBackup for Desktops/Laptops backup
Anyone have an experience with doing this, or other solutions I should look at to do this? thanks. +-- |This was sent by spal...@spaldam.com via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com. +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] NetBackup KMS best practices for passphrases
If I were to have my Information Security team provide only one of the passphrases when setting up the KMS database, which one would it be? In other words, which one would be required to rebuilt the entire databsae, and without it I would not be able to re-create any of the keys used by the tape drives? We don't want any one person to be able to re-create the database using the passphrases. I'm leaning towards the Key Protection key as it seems to tie into all the other keys, were the Host Master key is only there to protect the Key Protection key and nothing else. Am I on the right path here? +-- |This was sent by spal...@spaldam.com via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com. +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] 6.5.5 --> 7.0.1 Upgrade - No tapes are expiring
I had the same issue with tapes not getting de-assigned after upgrading from 6.5.4 to 6.5.6. The solution was to do some cleanup: Stop NetBackup Rename /usr/openv/netbackup/db/jobs/pempersist2 to /usr/openv/netbackup/db/jobs/pempersist2.sav Rename /usr/openv/netbackup/bin/bpsched.d/last_time_expired_media to /usr/openv/netbackup/bin/bpsched.d/last_time_expired_media.save Then start netbackup again. the problem was somehow related to the cleanup process that runs every 12 hours by default. For some reason it wasn't running because these files were somehow messed up during the upgrade. -- scott.george 6.5.5 --> 7.0.1 Upgrade - No tapes are expiring I performed the 6.5.5 to 7.0.1 upgrade on Tuesday, and made the amazing discovery that my tapes are not expiring when the day/time comes. This also means that I am not getting any of my media back from off site. Has anybody else encountered this? Thank you in advance! +-- |This was sent by spal...@spaldam.com via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com. +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] bpduplicate to multiple drive
To run multiple streams of bpduplicate form the command line, requires running mulitple bpduplicate commands. You'll have to write a script that splits up the images list into groupings and then runs a separate bpduplicate command for each grouping. Be careful with this however, if you are reading from tape (hopefully not), you should group them by the Media ID they are on as to prevent a delay in one stream as it waits for the other to release the tape it's using, just to have the other then wait for the same tape to be released again, and so on. +-- |This was sent by spal...@spaldam.com via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com. +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] anyone who has experience on hyper-v backup
When backing up Hyper-V guests, I've seen throughput averaging around 11MB/s, but with peaks as high as 40 MB/s. I would like to see better, and suspect it would be better as the load on the servers were minimal during my testing. +-- |This was sent by spal...@spaldam.com via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com. +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Netbackup 7 & Hyper-V
For the Hyper-v host, you probably only need a SAN media sever, as you won't to using it to backup anything else, right? That is if the one node is able to backup all the other nodes i the cluster without having to pull data across the network. +-- |This was sent by spal...@spaldam.com via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com. +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Windows 2008 R2 NBU 7.0 Master, attempting CIFS Basic Disk S
mozje wrote: > Just as a followup should people care. This is working perfectly in nbu, you > only need to setup the cifs share correctly :) which was not the case at my > first attempts. How do you set it up correctly? (as apposed to incorrectly) Thanks. +-- |This was sent by spal...@spaldam.com via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com. +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Master server upgrade
I've used the method of swinging the SAN attached /usr/openv/ over to the new server and it worked perfectly. TAR will have the same affect. As other have mentioned... Make sure you new system has NetBackup installed before hand, Test out the new server to make sure everything works on it before the move, and make sure you re-name the new server to have the exact same name(s) and network connections as the old one did or you will have issues. As for licenses, copy them down from the get_license_keys command, or there's another one that I can't remember the name of that will spit them out in a more CSV friendly format. I believe the catalog restore includes everything form the old system, including configuration. Even if your devices are exactly the same on the new system, I still recommend deleting all the old devices from the configuration, and re-do your entire device configuration after the move. Victor Engle wrote: > List, > > I'm planning a Netbackup server upgrade from Solaris 8 sparc to Solaris 10 on > CMT (T5120) and I wondered if anyone might have a check list or plan that > might have been used to do a similar upgrade? The master is the only server > in the environment. > > > At a high level I know I need to do the following... > > > 1. Install the solaris 10 system and get netbackup installed on the new > system. > 2. Stop netbackup on the old server. > 3. Restore the catalog to the new server > 4. Configure Storage Units on the new server. > > > Questions: > > > 1. How are the licenses moved from the old server to the new server? > 2. Does the catalog restore include the policies or are they restored some > other way? > 3. What are the gotchas I might try to avoid? > > > Thanks for any experiences you might be willing to share. > Vic +-- |This was sent by spal...@spaldam.com via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com. +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] destaging to multiple destinations
Marion Hakanson wrote: > spaldam via netbackup-forum < at > backupcentral.com said: > Oh, we have in-line copy, we just don't have Advanced Disk and SLP's, > which is what they want $50k for. As I said, Not Going to Happen. > Our customers cannot afford any of the capacity-based licensing options, > and that's before any of those next-generation gene sequencers start > putting out 2TB/week of data later this year. That must be a change when the introduced advanced disk. I thought remembered back in the 5.x days making multiple copies from a DSSU. Or maybe my brain is just getting rotted out with all the new stuff... I haven't used DSSU's since then in favor of using vault instead. +-- |This was sent by spal...@spaldam.com via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com. +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] netbackup 7 alternate client restore
Martin, Jonathan wrote: > How about dropping the No.Restrictions touch file into db\altnames\ Even under 6.5 it's not there by default. You have to create it. +-- |This was sent by spal...@spaldam.com via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com. +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Orphaned globDB entries
Marianne Van Den Berg wrote: > I've been racking my brain to try and figure out where these orphaned entries > are coming from - Seems these drives are still physically in the robot - a > total of 19 drives. The 6 drives that show up in vmglob output with only a > serial # can be seen by the 'scan' command when the robot reports on drives > physically in the robot. NetBackup does get a lot of the drive configuration information form the robot. Sounds like you need to reconfigure your robot to stop reporting these drives to NetBackup. +-- |This was sent by spal...@spaldam.com via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com. +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] destaging to multiple destinations
Marion Hakanson wrote: > However, the Admin Console does not present one with the option of setting > the retention -- only the storage unit and volume pool are available (also > "if this copy fails" and "media owner"). It doesn't allow you to do it because you probably aren't licensed for it. Shell out that $50k for in-line copy capabilities, and then you'll likely be able to do it. +-- |This was sent by spal...@spaldam.com via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com. +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] ndmp datadomain & OST
It's an NDMP backup in the sens that the source is using NDMP, but it's not a full NDMP backup in that your target is not NDMP. It will have to go threw a media server to utilize OST, were most people using NDMP send it straight to a NDMP enabled tape drive (bypassing the media sever). Maybe you could get DataDomain to add a VTL to their box to do true source to target NDMP backups; if they support that (DataDomain's not well know for their VTL capabilities). +-- |This was sent by spal...@spaldam.com via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com. +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Windows 2008 R2 NBU 7.0 Master, attempting CIFS Basic Disk S
I've never done it, and don't recommend it for performance reasons, but I believe you need to first mount the CIFS share as a drive on the local NetBackup Server, and then setup basic disk to use the drive letter (not the network path). +-- |This was sent by spal...@spaldam.com via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com. +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Tape Robot Comparison
The question you really have to ask about PTT is if your media servers are capable of handling the I/O or not (for the duplication jobs from the DXi7500 to tape), and it's really a question of if you are pushing your tape drives fast enough to fully utilize them. If you need help in this area, I'd say it's defiantly worth it as it will remove that I/O from the media server and put it directly on the DXi7500, were its going to have to be either way anyway. The other question is about loosing a fiber connection. I have no problem loosing one of the fiber connections for it because the other three give me more than enough bandwidth for my needs. I actually wish I could have two of them for it, or decide which one gets used for it (they force you to use FC6), incase something fails and I need to failover to a different connection. The one thing that bugs me the most about Path-to-Tape is I have no visibility into threw-put speeds on that fiber path that gets dedicated to it because it's not going threw any servers I can use to see it, my switched don't seem to report it with near enough detail to be sure, and it's not getting reported by the DXi7500 either (they're working on it they tell me). NetBackup also says SSO isn't supported on the target drives used for PTT, which means you have to dedicate physical drives to PTT; however, I've used it with SSO just fine on 6.5.2. I shut it off after going to 6.5.3 because of some bugs in NetBackup, but plan to turn it back on in 6.5.4 were those known bugs are fixed (I'll find out for sure next week after the upgrade). You'll defiantly want to make sure you dedicate some virtual drives on the DXi to PTT/NDMP. As for advantages, I haven't really seen any, but then I have some fairly beefy media severs and without visibility into the thru-put it's really a guessing game. Duplications don't seem any slower or faster (as long as I'm doing them from QBFS/stating/cache), but how much of a difference it it is impossible to tell for sure. The only weird thing from a NetBackup perspective, is how it works with NDMP (yes you have to have NDMP for NetBackup to use PTT), in that it assigns the media to the DXi7500 as if it was the media server residence for the tapes written with it. It make me wonder how well restores will work with that configuration. I guess I need to test that more, but for now I just have a script that re-assigns them to another media server. I'm using the Master as both my Vault/duplication and NDMP/PTT server, and it seems to work fine that way; especially with PTT so the I/O load isn't actually on the master. You get the same efficiencies with PTT as you would get with using a dedicated server for duplications, except that you don't have to buy another server. smpt wrote: > Hi, > May I ask, are you satisfied with the Path to tape option? It is worth to > loose one fiber optic to do the duplications? > As I see it, having one dedicated media server for duplication and not using > one dedicate fiber for path to tape is more efficient. > > What I like at DXi7500 id the ability to duplicate to another DXi with the > knowledge of NBU (with the latest firmware.) +-- |This was sent by spal...@spaldam.com via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com. +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Tape Robot Comparison
I love the L700's, but after doing a lot of research last year I found that Storage-Tek was falling behind the technologies. The front runners for me was SpectraLogic, and Quantum/ADIC. We ended up with an Quantum i2000 with 10 LTO4's and 200 slots with plenty of room for future expansion by adding additional bays. The SpectraLogic was a very close second and we went with Quantum because we have a DXi7500 that worked well with it using Direct Path-To-Tape. The SL3000 wasn't yet available, but from what we were told it wasn't going to have all the features we liked in the others. Either way, I'd definitely suggest looking around. +-- |This was sent by spal...@spaldam.com via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com. +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Vault catalog backup hanging - limit reached - queued
I have the same problem with Hot catalog backups hanging with 6.5.3 on Solaris 10. It's supposedly fixed in 6.5.4; I'll know by the end of next week if it truly is. I work around it by waiting until all backups are done, and killing the hung jobs, then doing an "nbrbutil -resetall". After that I use "robtest" to make sure all the drives are cleared out, and manually eject any tapes that are still in the library. After that 90% of the time, the next Hot catalog backup is successful. +-- |This was sent by spal...@spaldam.com via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com. +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Vault catalog backup hanging - limit reached - queued
I've got the same problem with my catalog backup occasionally hanging with 6.5.3 running o Solaris. I worked around it by until no jobs are running and then doing an "nbrbutil -resetall". You may then have to use robtest to manually un-load and tapes left in drives. This typically happens because 6.5.3 had a bug in it (supposedly fixed in 6.5.4 - I'll now by the end of this next wee if it actually fixed it) so that if the catalog backup fails or failed to exit properly, the next run hangs because it thinks the last run is still running. +-- |This was sent by spal...@spaldam.com via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com. +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] NetBakcup Service Set to Automatic 6.5.3 SAN CLIENT
Make all you're drives HCART, and all your tapes HCART, then they become interchangeable. Of course you'll then have to find some other method of tracking witch tapes are of what type, such as volume pools and bar-code labels. Dean wrote: > I have this problem with 2 different capacity IBM 3592 media types. I > couldn't work out any way to get NetBackup to use 2 different media types on > one drive. > > Luckily I have enough tape drives that I was able to set some drives to > HCART, and some to HCART2. It means I lose a certain amount of flexibility, > but at least I can use both media types, and can specify which backups use > which media type. > > Cheers > Dean > > On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 11:10 PM, Schaefer, Harry > turner.com (Harry.Schaefer < at > turner.com)> wrote: > > > Does NBU have the capability to use multiple media types in the same > > drive based on policy? > > > > My example is a Sun T1 drive. There are two different types of tape > > available. A standard tape that holds 1TB/2TB compressed & the Sport > > version which holds about 250gb/500gb. Depending on the data being > > backed up, we prefer the sport for faster access times. > > > > Curious if NBU can utilize different scratch pools for this type of > > customization or if it is tied to a single media type per drive? > > > > Harry S. > > Atlanta > > ___ > > Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu > > (Veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu) > > http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu > > (http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu) > > > +-- |This was sent by spal...@spaldam.com via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com. +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] NetBakcup Service Set to Automatic 6.5.3 SAN CLIENT
You can use bar-code rules to put different types of tapes into different Volume Pools based on their labels, but you only get a single "scratch" pool. If you want to use Scratch pools, you have to do it based on media type/density settings. However, to use the two different tape technologies in the same tape drive, they all have to be set to the same media type/density and the drive of course has to be compatible with both tape types. It would be nice if a single drive could be configured to read/write or just read different media types/densities but currently NetBackup does not offer this capability. If you do it based on Volume Pool then just setup each policy to use the appropriate Volume Pool, or set the schedules do an in-line copy to send data to both Volume Pools. If you do it based on media type/density, then you have to select the appropriate storage unit for that density/type. Again, in-line copy can be used to select both at the schedule level. Keep in mind that with in-line copy you're backups will only go as fast as the slowest drive/tape, and probably even a bit slower. Multiplexing is a must with in-line copy, in my opinion, or you can end up with backups going twice as slow. Schaefer, Harry wrote: > Does NBU have the capability to use multiple media types in the same drive > based on policy? > . . . > Curious if NBU can utilize different scratch pools for this type of > customization or if it is tied to a single media type per drive? > Harry S. +-- |This was sent by spal...@spaldam.com via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com. +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] NetBackup vs. The Rest of the World
Thanks for everyone's response on DPM. I agree it looks like a great tool for backing up remote offices, and possibly even other Microsoft specific applications like SQL, SharePoint, and Exchange. My real problem though, is that we are talking about using it for our entire data center, or at least as much as possible. I don't want to end up supporting two different backup systems, one for Windows and one for UNIX. I could use some specific argument as to why NetBackup is a better solution for our Datacenter as a whole. +-- |This was sent by spal...@spaldam.com via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com. +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] NetBackup vs. The Rest of the World
So how to I convince my VP of IT that BPM doesn't even play in the same space as NetBackup, when the keep hearing the BPM is "Enterprise Level" and think that they can replace NetBackup with it? I'd rather not have to actually set it up and end up with two backup enviorments to manage. +-- |This was sent by spal...@spaldam.com via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com. +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] NetBackup and DPM Policies
For Netbackup, I'd just use the bppllist command to list all fo the policies, and then run it again, once for each policy to get the details. You can then pull out the information you find relvant. I'd think you'd want to give a listing of all systems being backed up, when they are backed up, and what exactly is being backed up on each of them. You may also want to show how long the backed up data is retained for. As for BPM, I'm doing some research on it as my upper management wants us to use more Microsoft products, and keeps talking about replacing NetBackup with BPM. From what I"m seeing so far I don't think this is possible, but I need to comple all the reasons why. If you have any information on the differeances between BPM and NetBackup, I would appriciate it. Thanks. +-- |This was sent by spal...@spaldam.com via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com. +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Backups on one client hanging at the same point every time
Sounds like either a networking issue with the client, or a timeout issue caused by the client software not being able to read a file, or getting hung up on a directory with a lot of little files in it. Try defrag & checkdisk on the client and see if it hangs too. +-- |This was sent by spal...@spaldam.com via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com. +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] LTO4 recognized as DLT
Check your barcode rules, or use the "vmchange" command to force it to HCART. +-- |This was sent by spal...@spaldam.com via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com. +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Standalone to Custered migration
Jack.Forester wrote: > I seem to remember reading in the HA guide that going from a non-clustered > server to a clustered server is not supported. Doesn't mean it's not > possible, though. Marianne's suggestion of building the server as a cluster, > then doing a bprecover sounds like it might work. Just make sure you make the > cluster name the same as the name of the original standalone. You definitely > want to read the HA guide. What clustering software are you using? You are correct: >From the Veritas NetBackup High Availability Administrators Guide >(NetBackup_Administorator_HighAvalability.pdf) document: Page 14: NetBackup does not support the conversion of an existing non-failover NetBackup server to a failover NetBackup server. Contact Symantec Enterprise Technical Support. In other words, this requires consulting services. I guess that's what you get for not reading the first couple of chapters because you think they are just a bunch of fluff. We've tried doing the recovery after configuring it in the cluster. The problem at that point is that NetBackup is not aware that it's in a cluster, which causes a big problem with the device configurations. We are using the latest version of VCS, so it's definitely supported, just apparently not with using our old EMM database. Any ideas on how to remedy this situation, or when it will be supported? I really don't want to have to re-inventory or loose 7 years worth of old tapes. Maybe we can get one of our DBA's to crack open the Sybase Database and find a solution to our problem? +-- |This was sent by spal...@spaldam.com via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com. +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Standalone to Custered migration
We've tested doing it in the order you described as well, but after the recovery the cluster configuration within NetBackup gets messed up as netbackup looses any knowledge of it being clustered. Once again it appears to be because the EMM database gets overwritten; this time with the recovered database that is configured for a standalone configuration. There's got to be something we are missing; if someone has actually gotten it to work before. Has anyone gotten this to work before? +-- |This was sent by spal...@spaldam.com via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com. +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Backup Survey request - resubmit
A few of you're survey questions are poorly worded and make no sense, or seam loaded. Yes you can reduce costs related to backups for some of the scenarios, but at potential costs to your overall budget, especially if a disaster occurs and restores take too long. +-- |This was sent by spal...@spaldam.com via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com. +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Standalone to Custered migration
We are using the clustering script that comes with NetBackup. The problem I think is that the script drops the old EMM database and recreates a new one with the new cluster configuration. It then says it's populating the new database, but apparently it's not doing a very good job of putting all of our information back into it. My colleagues and I have search and search for documentation, and we have found plenty of it talking about how to build a clustered netbackup system, and how to restore the catalog, but nothing on going from a standalone (that started at v3.5 and is now at v6.5.2a with EEB) into a clustered environment. It's clearly a problem with the EMM database, but how do we get around this problem? [quote="ewilts"] It sounds like you don't have EMM properly defined in the cluster. There are a bunch of High Availability guides on the Symantec web site depending on your specific release and platform. +-- |This was sent by spal...@spaldam.com via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com. +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Standalone to Custered migration
I'm trying to replace the Master server with some new hardware, (simple enough to do, and I've done this successfully before) but I'd also like to cluster the master server. I've done some testing on this using a catalog recovery that looks perfectly fine at first, until it's brought into the cluster. After clustering all the media, volume pools, and volume groups are missing. I'm still able search for and restore old data, but I have no visibility into all most old tapes. Any suggesting would be appreciated. Thanks. +-- |This was sent by spal...@spaldam.com via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com. +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Force Interface for NOM
I want to use a VIP for my NOM install so that when I replace/move servers around in the future I can keep the same IP and DNS name for the NOM connection and not have to re-do firewall rules to all of our different NetBackup environments. Is this even possible? Will using the bp.conf in the client config cause this to happen? Thanks, - spaldam.com +-- |This was sent by spal...@spaldam.com via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com. +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] LTO4 recognized as DLT
I saw this problem myself, and adding another barcode rule fixed it. +-- |This was sent by spal...@spaldam.com via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com. +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] "/" + Cross All Mnt Pts Vs. ALL_LOCAL_DRIVES
Be save use ALL_LOCAL_DRIVES, then exclude all your database, temporary, device, and other special files. There are plenty of other settings that you can use to control other performance/trashing concerns. +-- |This was sent by spal...@spaldam.com via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com. +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] NOM 6.5.
I started to see problems with the Master server not allowing connections to the EMM database shortly after setting up NOM. Apparently the EMM database has a limit on the number of connections it will allow, and with NOM and a half dozen Java Admin Consoles running, we started to see problems. Fortunately shutting down a few Admin Consoles fixes the problem. Now I'm just trying to figure out how to force NOM to use a VIP/network interface that is different from the server name as we lease replace our servers every few years, and we want the NOM serer name to remain the same between replacements. Dean wrote: > Ed, > > I'm interested to know how you think NOM contributed to problems on your > master. Can you elaborate? > > Our master is RHEL4, NOM running on a Win2003 box. NOM is kinda helpful, but, > if there is any chance of it causing problems on the master, I will shut down > NOM immediately. > > Thanks, > Dean > > On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 9:57 AM, Ed Wilts ewilts.org (ewilts < > at > ewilts.org)> wrote: > > > On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 3:27 PM, Andrew White inchix.net > > (adwhite < at > inchix.net)> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > I'm just wondering what are peoples thoughts on NOM 6.5? In what capacity > > > are you using NOM (reporting and/or alerting (snmp/email)) and has anyone > > > got it configured in a cluster? > > > > > > After the Customer Forum in Roseville at the end of October, Erica > > convinced me to put it up. Although I generally like NOM, we haven't had > > much success with it and the we've got an open case where it seems to > > contribute to tipping over our master server (and yes, it's a separate > > server). Right now, we've got NOM turned off. > > > > YMMV, obviously. > +-- |This was sent by spal...@spaldam.com via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com. +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Reg: Migrate Master server to media server
Sounds like what you want to do is a merging of masters witch officially required Symantec consulting services; or you could make one of your masters into a master of masters. +-- |This was sent by spal...@spaldam.com via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com. +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Backing up Exchange 07 on a backup network
We tried this, and came to the conclusion that it won't work because of the way Exchange and the NetBackup extension for Exchange work together. It's basically required that you use the DNS name for the exchange server to access the database properly to back it up properly. +-- |This was sent by spal...@spaldam.com via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com. +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Resources needed to tame NetBackup
I've got a two man Engineering/Admin team, and between 1-3 operators on duty at any given time to help manage our 1 large implementation and 4 other small international implementations. Of course the Operators also have other responsibilities as well, and one of the Engineers/Admins also spends half his time doing UNIX Admin work. The way you implement and manage your environment as a whole will make a big difference in how efficiently it runs, and how many people you'll need to maintain it. Since NetBackup usually has it's fingers in all the pies, you can see how it will have a direct affect on how many people it takes to keep it running as well. One good rule of thumb though, never have only one person who has in-depth knowledge of any one system or application. If you lose that person, for whatever reason, youll be hurting until you can get another person into that roll, and get them familiar with the environment. +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Linux client code 41
Sounds like you might be getting there, but it's not getting back. Make sure your firewall to the DMZ is open both ways for the NetBackup ports. Try using vnetd if your pre v6.x. +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] User Archive Skipping Files?
I think it depends on your file list. If you specify a folder, it will remove the folder (i.e. d:\archivefolder). If you specify specific files, it will only remove the specific files (i.e. d:\archivefolder\*). The best way to prove it is to test it... +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] NBU cross-site
If you can only aford one master, I wouldn't cluster it across the WAN. If your link goes down and both nodes start acting as the primary node, you'll never get them back in sync without blowing away something valuable on one or the other. Also, I don't think NetBackup masters are supported in an Active/Active envorment. Pulse I'm not sure how that will work for the catalog information. It would have to be replicated between sites somehow anyway. Keep your master at once site, and the media server at the other site, then send your tapes from the one to the other for DR purposes. If you lose the master, youll have to rebuilt it at the other site. +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Restore performance questions in NB
I've dealt with this exact issue many times before. Its a balancing act that really boils down to this: Only one restore job can access the same tape at a time, and each restore job can only use one tape at a time (there is a new feature for doing parallel restores that were multiplexed, but that only applies to certain situations that databases dont fall under). The best solution for this is to duplicate all the images on the tapes to a DSU (disk storage unit), then all the restore jobs can access the DSU all at the same time. Make sure you duplicate the entire tape (not individual images) to get the duplication done as quickly as possible. This is also one of the reasons why having your on-site backup copy be on disk is getting to be so popular. In fact, I wouldnt even consider doing hourly database log backups directly to tape. Also, the less often you do your log backups, and the more logs you get backed up in a single stream (meaning fewer backup images) the faster your restores will be. To answer your questions: 1-2. Volume Pools can help you divide up your data and improve performance, if done correctly, but it can also cause you to use more media with tapes not getting filled up. Again, its a balancing act, but most place Ive worked at are more concerned about costs than performance (at least until they need something restored ASAP). 3 & 5. You can only specify storage units for backups (not specific tape drives), so you have to configure your storage units accordingly if you want to restrict which drives get used for what. On the other hand, restores only care which server they were backed up on (I'm not familiar with a way to force the use of a certain storage unit for a restore). You may want to make a close inventory of your storage units to see why you always have a couple of drives available; it may have been designed that way on purpose to allow for restores or user initiated backups to be done at any time. 4. Especially with Databases, it's a delicate balancing act. Improving one often has a negative impact on the other; again using disk staging areas or VTL can help a great deal with this by eliminating the need for multiplexing and improving overall performance. Just remember tapes are linear, so to get to the data at the end of the tape, means the drive has to pull the entire tape through it, and it can only read one part of the tape at a time. +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Vault Eject/Reporting Issues?
Sounds like your volume groups may not be consistent. Vault relies on them to know where tapes are and which ones it's supposed to eject. Another thing that it could be is if you are doing deferred ejects and consolidated reports. You need a separate Vault setup for each different type of media you have in the library, but also keep in mind that it cannot eject tapes that are in use. +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] 6.5.2 Patch for ICS?
ICS has its own version numbers separate from NBU. +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] NBU cross-site
First, you cannot run NetBackup servers in a Zone. The UNIX admin here already tried that and the install script even said it wasn't supported. Second, I wouldn't run master/media servers across a WAN; especially since NOM has the ability to manage multiple Master servers from a centralized console. If you lose the WAN, you done and all you backups fail. Third, with new de-duplication and replication products that are available today, they offer a great solution for doing your own self insurance with each site having a replicated copy of the other. I'm going to be using Quantums DXi units here soon to do just that. +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] No of LTO Tapes used for backups
WEAVER, Simon \(extern... wrote: > Is there a good way to work out how many slots I could well need when going > from 12 x LTO2 drives to a SL500 8 x LTO4 drives What library are you currently using? I ask because you might be better off keeping it. I'm currently dealing with a full rack sized SL500 with 14 drives and it's the biggest pain of a robot that I've ever had to deal with. I'd never get another SL500, unless it was for a small implementation or a test environment. They are far from enterprise level, and if youre doing 8 LTO4's, I'd say you are at that level. As for LTO4's, you almost need some kind of disk staging, snapshot backups, or VTL to really get the performance out of them. Doing a bunch of small client backup over the network will not push your LTO4's fast enough to keep them busy, and you run into a serious bottleneck as ewilts was mentioning. +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] NBU System needs more tape drives?
I've always written scripts to do this for me. I pull information like total amount of data backed up each week. How many jobs are active within a given time interval, etc. You can also use the "tpclean -l" command to collect mount times for each tape drive, and keep a log of how they change from day to day. The real issue you have to watch for, is how long does it take to backup everything; are you meeting your SLA's and/or expectations in that regard. +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] checking backup quality
If you want a 100% fool proof verification, restore the data to /dev/null. Even then, who knows what might happen to that tape the very next day... That's why multiple copies are so important, or retention periods that overlap by a couple of reiterations. +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] [Slightly OT] Federal Gov. Guidelines/Standards on Retention
I've dealt with HIPPA, FDA, and other legal issues (despite what some people seem to think, SOX has no say in this matter). Usually the retention is 7 years; though if it's a law-suite, and you haven't destroyed the tapes, the lawyers will make you re-inventory them and restore everything on them (lesson: destroy or re-use your old tapes). I had one situation were we had to make a special e-mail system backup every week and send it directly to the lawyers with an infinite retention (that was a big hassle). I've seen the 7 years be a yearly backup, a monthly backup, and in a few rare instances, a weekly backup. It really depends a lot on what kind of data you are dealing with, and the business or area of government you work in. My suggestion, keep the data for a short a period of time that you can while still satisfying the needs of the business. If people come to you and say they need to keep some bit of information indefinitely, tell them they had better not delete it then. +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] HP Omniback vs Netbackup
What little experience I've had with Omniback tells me that it's not as fully featured as NetBackup, but that it works really well for remote sites (one of the reason's NetBackup came up with Pure Disk - to better compete in that area). I'd suggest reading up as much as you can on Omniback, so you can explain the differences, and tell give them specifics about how NetBackup is better. Switching out a backup solutions is never a simple task either. Believe me, I've done it a few times. +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Legato vs. NetBackup
I've see this issue come up before: ""Our Backup environment doesnt work very well!!"", and for some reason they think software is the answer; ignoring the fact that the new software also gets new hardware, a newly engineered strategy, and a fresh new install to go with it. NetBackup will also run a lot better if you do the same upgrades, and clean up all the old crap you don't need any more. When I first started working with NetBackup, it was because or vendor for Legato had messed up our agreement and backed out of the deal. Im glad that it happened which allowed me to now be the experienced NetBackup Administrator I am today. I dont think legato would have given me the opportunities to do many of the wonderful things Ive done with NetBackup. But thats more of an emotional reason then a factual one. Just make sure your manager understands that you have to demo Legato with a similar load and infrastructure you NetBackup environment is currently on, or its not a fair comparison. +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Pushing unix clients
You should only need to use SSH for new installs. Upgrades should be able to use the NetBackup client it'self to push the updates across. Here's some of my notes: /usr/openv/netbackup/bin/install_client_files ssh NEWHOST NOTE: you must first have ssh keys for "root" in place first for this to work. echo Solaris Solaris10 NEWHOST > /admin/nbu/tmp/client.lst /usr/openv/netbackup/bin/update_dbclients Oracle -ClientList /admin/nbu/tmp/client.lst echo Solaris Solaris10 HOSTNAME > /admin/nbu/tmp/client.lst /usr/openv/netbackup/bin/update_clients -ClientList /admin/nbu/tmp/client.lst --- "usage: $0 [-ForceInstall -Install_Client_Bins -Install_SNC] \\ [-ClientList filename | hardware_type operating_system]" +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Could not build host list when running bpexpdate.
I'd do a bpmedialist -m MEDIAID on the tape you are trying to expire (or the tape the image resides on) and see what server name it gives you. +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] SAN Catalog restore slow and failing.
Has anyone had issues with their SAN catalog backups going slow, and have a solution for it? We do Hot Catalog Backups inline to tape (off-site - copy 1) and disk (on-site - copy 2). We are now testing the restorability of the on-site SAN based copy, and are having issues with it going slow (6 hours vs.. 2 hours from tape) and then failing at the end; where it's trying to find the tapes used during the same backup. Why would it want to tapes when we are trying to restore from the disk copy? We even removed all the tape information from the DR file. Why would it be running so slow? We are using 6.5.2 on Solaris 9. Any help would be appreciated... +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Anyone using media sharing in 6.5?
ACS takes a lot of the control away from NetBackup, so NetBackup can't be guaranteed it's getting exactly what it needs to complex operations like this. Too many variables would be my guess, so they don't feel conformable certifying the combination. +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Shared Stroage Options (SSO) with Vitual Tape Library (VTL)
Quantum uses a variable block size for their dedup, which they claim gives them a much higher de-duplication ratio. If you multiplex, the "natural boundaries" that quantum looks for get chopped up and that lowers the effectiveness of the de-duplication. As for having problems with SSO and physical tape drives, I've talked to people about that myself, and have seen problems with it too. 99% of the time, it's fixed with firmware upgrades on the tape drives and/or the HBA's. When I first started using the Quantum DXi's, I had problems when trying to do multiple reads, that might ( and I stress might ) have been caused by SSO, but after a firmware upgrade I haven't see any problems (so far). It seems to be working fine, and the only good reason I've heard for not using SSO with it so far, is concerns about unnecessary complexity within the environment. I however, think the extra complexity will help our environment obtain higher performance. +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Shared Stroage Options (SSO) with Vitual Tape Library (VTL)
We are converting to capacity based licensing, and SSO is included in the Enterprise tier that we are getting, so no licensing concerns are involved. The reason I'm looking at using SSO is because the VTL only supports up to 30 virtual drives or 30 streams of data at a time, and since it's also does de-duplication, we cannot use multiplexing or we loose the effectiveness of the de-duplication. 30 drives between 6 servers, means we can only do 5 streams at a time when evenly divided up. With SSO, we can allow one server to do up to 30 at a time when it's heavily loaded, or non when it's idle. Hopefully that makes more sense to everyone now, and we can actually talk about any of the more technical reasons why it might not work to well. This won't be our final configuration, but before I know for certain what that final configuration needs to look like, it would be helpful to know if I'm going to run into any problems with functionality using SSO on a VTL. +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Anyone using media sharing in 6.5?
Maybe I need to read up a little more on this media sharing. Any suggestions on using it with Vault? We are using VTL's, and then using Vault to duplicate and send off-site physical tapes. +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Shared Stroage Options (SSO) with Vitual Tape Library (VTL)
I've heard that it's not a good idea to use SSO with VTL's. I'm looking for specifics as to why, and what kinds of problems it can cause. Any personal experiences with specifics would be helpful. Thanks. We are using a Quantum DXi5500 (emulating ADIC i500 and dlt7000's per Quantums recommendation) and SL500 for physical tapes to go off-site. We have 3 Media servers and 2 SAN media servers, plus the Master that also acts as a media server. I had some problems with tape mounts on the DXi not getting satisfied when doing multiple reads, but since it has had a complete Firmware refresh and it seems to be working much better now. Im not sure if the issue was due to using SSO or not. +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Anyone using media sharing in 6.5?
What do you mean by Vaulting? Are you duplicating, or just using it to eject tapes? If you are duplicating, I would suggest using an "alternate read server" and do all your duplicating threw a single server so the data gets condensed onto fewer tapes. I don't see why the alternate restore server options wouldn't still work. +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] install_client_files over ssh using a different port
NetBackup shouldn't care what port SSH uses. All it cares about is that you want to use SSH. Your SSH configuration and "services" configuration should determine the rest. +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Removing 6.5.2 and going back to 6.5.1
6.5.2 has been working wonderfully for me for the last month, running on Solaris 9. The upgrade fixed a lot of issues we had after going to 6.5.0, and we were on 5.1 MP5 before that no known issues. (5.1 MP5 really was a very solid version in my experience, and so far 6.5.2 seems to be working well too). I wouldn't recommend every using 6.0x. +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Netbackup verify at write time
The best thing I can say is: "Make Multiple Copies". This is why I always make sure I have at least 2 copies of my next longest retention before expiring the shorter retention(S). For example: If you do weekly full backups, keep you're daily incremental backups for at least 2 weeks. In turn, if you're monthly backups have a longer retention, keep your weekly full backups for at least 2 months. Even if you verify the tape using a restore to be absolutely certain, that tape will eventually deteriorate, and could potentially get damaged. Any kind of electronic media is far from indestructible. If you truly paranoid, don't rely on your backup system as your only point of recovery. Backup systems should be first and foremost designed for disaster recovery (although if you have the funds replication works even better), and secondarily for long term legal and archival purposes, and lastly as an operational recovery mechanism. There are much better ways to insure operational recovery (i.e. versioning filesystems) if you are truly that paranoid. I'm not saying your backup system can't do all three, and do them very well, but there are other methods that work better for giving your management the warm fuzzy they are looking for. Of course if all they really want is a warm fuzzy, just find some marketing documents that say the likely hood of a problem is extremely low (there are plenty of them out there). +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] How do you report on utilization?
bjgreenberg wrote: > For all of you doing heavy reporting on NBU, I've discovered an inconsistency > about how NBU reports job information between bpdbjobs and bpimagelist. They should be different. bpdbjobs shows how much data was backed up based on how it looks from a file system standpoint. bpimagelist shows how that data looks on what ever media you store it on. Block sizes will be different, so it will look different. Also keep in mind that Industrial standards for filesystem data is in 1024 byte chunks, but tape is done in 1000 byte chunks. +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Disable alternate client restores
If you can't trust your Backup administrator(s) - regardless of what backup software you are using - then you are in big trouble. You can lock NetBackup down so that only certain people can access the backup/restore functionality on the master; but that also means they can't have "root" or "admin" access on the master. Encrypting the backed up data might be an option to reduce (not eliminate) any risks you're concerned about, if you do it in such a way that it requires multiple people controlling multiple keys (I only know of one key management systems that provides this functionality) but it would be a nightmare to manage all those keys as they would have to be rotated very frequently. +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] (no subject)
If the filer doesn't have any actual NetBackup software behind it (using NDMP?), it might not be possible to label a tape in a drive (virtual or not) that is connected to a filer. It might be a good idea to have at least one drive in the VTL show up on the master or another media server, so you can do things like this. +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] (no subject)
You don't necessarily have to do the bplabel with drives connected to the filer, but there should be a "-h" or "-host" switch you can use to tell bplabel which media server to perform the label on. +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] 1st Time NOM user - Athentication Services not running.
Apparently the problem was due to a custom report setup in NOM that had some issues with it. Once I corrected the problem, I could see all my scheduled reports just fine... +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] 1st Time NOM user - Athentication Services not running.
Ok, now I can't seem to get any scheduled reports to work. If I set it up to do a daily report, it will send the report immediately, but when I go to managed my scheduled reports, it's blank. No scheduled reports. I've setup half a dozen of them, but they just seem to disappear as soon as I create them. I actually got an e-mail that I think was from one of these reports non-existent schedules I created, but all it said was Error in running the report. Please contact the administrator for further details. I am the administrator, so Im not who to do. +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] manually copying a disk image to a tape
The "Catalog" section in the Admin GUI makes it extreamly easy to do for little one-off's like this. +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] NOM performance/resources requirements
I know Symantec recommend NOM be on its own server, but is that really essential? If I have a big enough Master Server, and I'm not too concerned about security, are there any other reasons why NOM (and all its pre-requisites) couldn't be installed on the Master Server? I've got 1 large environment, and 4 small international sites I want to monitor with it. Currently I'm testing it out on a development machine that's likely going to get re-loaded soon. I need a more permanent place for it, but don't have any extra servers lying around. +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] netware backups failing with error 13
I see error 13's a lot on Windows servers, and usually a reboot with fix it. I'm not sure if the same thing will work for NetWare, but I suspect it's because of a file or group of files that didn't get file locks released properly. +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Hot Catalog Backup Netbackup 6.0
There's a specific install package you have to use for Windows 2008 x64, and yes it has to be a 6.5.2 base install (no patching allowed). +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] NBU 6.5 - Is there a Windows NT Admin Console????
The Admin Console is on the same CD as the server software, because it has a lot of the same componants as a full server install. It's essentially a server that dosn't have any of the media or master server functionality on it. +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Update NBU6.0MP4 to MP6.0MP6 -> Error 811
Sounds to me like some of your NetBackup services aren't running. +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] 1st Time NOM user - Athentication Services not running.
Apparently I had to install both authentication pieces, configure the authentication, and then re-configure NOM once I had the authentication services working. It's all up and running now What a confusing installation process. I had to read 5 different documents, and essentially configure 4 different pieces of software to get it all working. someone needs to do a step by step, from the beginning 1st time install document for NOM. May I'll have to do it myself? +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] (no subject)
I've seen this happen when the windows client isn't configured on the master as a client. The No.Restirctions file will let you get away with browsing, but when you initiate the restore, it'll hang because it's not a valid client. kdeems wrote: > Im at Sungard testing DR. > > I just ran into an issue I've never seen before. > > The master aix 5.3, 6.0 mp5 is fully restored and functional. The master > can perform a restore to itself and the master can push restores to > clients. > > The problem, any restore initiated from the windows client fails, just > hangs - I can cancel restore and restart the restore the master server the > restore runs fine, no issues. > > client and master can ping each other, bpclncmd runs fine and so on. > > Thanks. +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] 1st Time NOM user - Athentication Services not running.
I can get the web-site to come up, but if I try to login it tells me: "User authentication failed. Verify Symantec Authentication Service is running." It's not running, if I try to start it nothing happens. Here's the /var/VRTSat/vxatd.log file: (858|1) Invalid AB configuration - cannot get configurationfrom CLI or local config (858|1) Error: 24609 - Broker not configured. in server.cpp(823) (6683|1) Invalid AB configuration - cannot get configurationfrom CLI or local config (6683|1) Error: 24609 - Broker not configured. in server.cpp(832) Any help would be appreciated. +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5.2 and NDMP Backups
selwyn wrote: > After updating to 6.5.2 all my NDMP backup jobs were failing with status code > 114. > > Looking at the job log I found this message path UNKNOWN. For some reason it > looks like the ndmp agent is not sending the correct information about the > backup path to Netbackup. > > Does anyone know how to correct this problem? I'd call support and complain. +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5.2 and NDMP Backups
briandiven wrote: > "At this time NetBackup does not support LDAP with AIX. As NetBackup is > compiled to work with AIX 5 (5.1, 5.2, 5.3), it has to be built against > the most common version. The AIX 5.1 (which NetBackup is complied > against) and AIX 5.2 did not (by default) contain the LDAP / PAM > authentication libraries, and this is why the NetBackup Java GUI will > not work with LDAP on AIX platforms. The simple answer is Don't use LDAP. You can be give them accounts on the AIX server, and use the login related to those accounts to access the Java GUI. You could also consider using the Windows x86 Admin GUI on a terminal server, and using VxSS with it there. +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] NOM 6.5 Installation
I'm not sure if this is really the problem, but I don't think NOM is supported in VM enviorments. Check the NetBackup performance and planning guide. NOM likes a good sized box to run on. +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
