[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 at ewilts.org (ewilts at ewilts.org) wrote: On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 3:27 PM, Andrew White adwhite at 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
Re: [Veritas-bu] NOM 6.5.
We evaluated NOM when we upgraded to 6.0. We also use Aptare. We decided that with Apare we had no real need for NOM. Our brief experience showed it to be unstable. We have not looked at the 6.5 version. -- Carl Stehman Distributed Services Pepcoholdings, Inc. 701 Ninth St NW Washington DC 20068 202-331-6619 Andrew White [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 11/09/2008 04:34 PM To VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu cc Subject [Veritas-bu] NOM 6.5. G'day, 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? Cheers Andrew___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu This Email message and any attachment may contain information that is proprietary, legally privileged, confidential and/or subject to copyright belonging to Pepco Holdings, Inc. or its affiliates (PHI). This Email is intended solely for the use of the person(s) to which it is addressed. If you are not an intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivery of this Email to the intended recipient(s), you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this Email is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please immediately notify the sender and permanently delete this Email and any copies. PHI policies expressly prohibit employees from making defamatory or offensive statements and infringing any copyright or any other legal right by Email communication. PHI will not accept any liability in respect of such communications. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] NOM 6.5.
Ed, if you don't have the EEB for NOM that fixes a memory leak (it's included in 6.5.3 and beyond), mention that in your case. I'd have brought this up at the quiz the wizards' session if I hadn't had a flight out before then on Thursday, so I just left a note about it, which Tim Burlowski (who I'm certain reads this list) just followed up on this past week. According to strings(1), you're after the code branch labeled NetBackup_6.5.2A_EEB1_PET1397478_SET1397396. (I've got the ia64 and PA-RISC versions for HP-UX, but so far as I can recall, that won't help you much.) -- gabriel rosenkoetter Radian Group Inc, Unix/Linux/VMware Sysadmin / Backup Recovery [EMAIL PROTECTED], 215 231 1556 -Original Message- From: Dean [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, November 09, 2008 9:02 PM To: Ed Wilts Cc: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NOM 6.5. 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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 3:27 PM, Andrew White [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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. .../Ed Ed Wilts, RHCE, BCFP, BCSD, SCSP, SCSE [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ 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] NOM 6.5.
On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 9:08 PM, Scott Jacobson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And so it may be time again to have NOM and Aptare discussion. Not really - they solve different problems. Aptare is a long-term reporting tool. It has almost no operational abilities. NOM, as its name says, is for operations. It has a short-term view of the environment and can do a lot of things that Aptare can't, like automatically up a down tape drive, send out SNMP traps, etc. NOM will never replace StorageConsole. However, it may be good enough for people who don't care about the stuff that StorageConsole does that NOM doesn't - and that list isn't short. NOM doesn't replace Veritas Backup Reporter either. NOM is free and can co-exist with StorageConsole. Get NOM running in your environment and see what it does for you. If you have no more reporting needs, you're done. If you still have reporting needs, then look at the various products from the different vendors and see which one solves your problems. Once we get our current resolved, I expect to be running both NOM and StorageConsole for a while but I don't see how NOM will replace StorageConsole either. I don't believe that NOM will allow me to have a year or more of history to report on. I've asked Aptare several times for reports on throughput by media server. So far, they haven't delivered but I noticed in my brief time using NOM that it has it (for the limited history that NOM held). .../Ed ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] NOM 6.5.
On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 8:01 PM, Dean [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ed, I'm interested to know how you think NOM contributed to problems on your master. Can you elaborate? We have an open case with Symantec on our issues right now. However, we also have an EEB in place for nbsl on the master that's causing the grief. We don't know yet if the stock image (on Solaris 10) has the issue or just the EEB. That's why I'm saying YMMV - I do know that NOM works fine for a lot of folks. .../Ed 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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 3:27 PM, Andrew White [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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. .../Ed Ed Wilts, RHCE, BCFP, BCSD, SCSP, SCSE [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] NOM 6.5.
I have both NOM and Aptare, NOM gives me the basic alerts as I already mentioned, like policy changes, tape drive down, tape media frozen, etc. Aptare gives me all comprehensive reporting for my environment. You cannot compare these two products, NOM has just some of reporting compatibilities, where Backup Reportorer comes to the picture with full reporting range. Regards, B On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 10:08 PM, Scott Jacobson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And so it may be time again to have NOM and Aptare discussion. Could those who've been a supporter and user of each now chime in give us their current comparative opinions? Thanks, -sj Dean [EMAIL PROTECTED] 11/9/2008 7:01 PM 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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 3:27 PM, Andrew White [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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. .../Ed Ed Wilts, RHCE, BCFP, BCSD, SCSP, SCSE [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ 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 ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] NOM 6.5.
Thanks Ed, I'm interested if anyone is using it in a large site and if so, it what capabilities, what server configuration and how is it performing for them :) By large, I mean tens of thousands of jobs and thousands of clients... Cheers Andrew On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 9:57 AM, Ed Wilts [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 3:27 PM, Andrew White [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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. .../Ed Ed Wilts, RHCE, BCFP, BCSD, SCSP, SCSE [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] NOM 6.5.
On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 3:27 PM, Andrew White [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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. .../Ed Ed Wilts, RHCE, BCFP, BCSD, SCSP, SCSE [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] NOM 6.5.
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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 3:27 PM, Andrew White [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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. .../Ed Ed Wilts, RHCE, BCFP, BCSD, SCSP, SCSE [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ 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
[Veritas-bu] NOM 6.5.
G'day, 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? Cheers Andrew ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] NOM 6.5.
Personally, I like NOM, it reports on any Policy changes, tape drives down, shortage on blank media, and so on. Then some of that I used to script, now comes with it at no cost. I have the second master server connected to it and now I can see how the remote site is performing as well. Boris On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 11:57 PM, Ed Wilts [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 3:27 PM, Andrew White [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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. .../Ed Ed Wilts, RHCE, BCFP, BCSD, SCSP, SCSE [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ 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] NOM 6.5.
NOM is free... aptare isnt. On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 2:08 PM, Scott Jacobson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And so it may be time again to have NOM and Aptare discussion. Could those who've been a supporter and user of each now chime in give us their current comparative opinions? Thanks, -sj Dean [EMAIL PROTECTED] 11/9/2008 7:01 PM 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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 3:27 PM, Andrew White [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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. .../Ed Ed Wilts, RHCE, BCFP, BCSD, SCSP, SCSE [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ 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 ___ 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
[Veritas-bu] NOM 6.5 Installation
I am trying to install NOM 6.5 on a Windows 2003 Server VM. I get most of the way through and then I get an error saying Windows can not find \vrtsnomdbsrv. I searched the HDD and found it right where it should be. I tried adding the directory to the system path but that didn't help. I turned of virus scanning, same deal. Google search and NBU Support site turned up nothing. I also made sure DEP was turned off. Every time I do this I have to reboot the server because the process hangs in Windows and drops a status somewhere on the box (file or reg key is not clear) so that when reattempting installation it skips instantly to the end where it tells me the installation was interrupted. Any thoughts besides don't use it or call Symantec? Thanks. Phil Koster Network Administrator City of Grand Rapids, MI Direct: 456-3136 Helpdesk: 456-3999 ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
