Re: [Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB
You can use netbackup with option 2. I've seen reduce of backup window with some installations. You do not have to send the backup to a Data domain. But the best results will come with a deduplication device, like data domain or Quantum. If you will go with option 2, remember to set the fileperset=1 at the RMAN script. From: Cornely, David [mailto:david_corn...@intuit.com] Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2012 7:20 PM To: Simon Weaver; stefanos; Mark Phillips; jcr...@marketforce.com.au Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB Few different solution options I can think of. I don't know what your underlying disk array tech is so I'm going to mention things I have experience with - maybe they'll work for you, maybe not. Option 1 Leverage underlying disk array technology to move data around. In the case of EMC you might consider BCVs that can incrementally update data to completely separate disks. You would only need to quiesce Oracle (hotbackupmode) for minutes or less while you split off the BCVs and then import/mount them on a media server that could then spin to tape. Downside to this is that in the case of Oracle, most files get modified and captured by NBU even if only a small amount of change occurred within. Option 2 Use Oracle RMAN with the DataDomain Incremental Merge option. This involves a one-time full and indefinite incremental RMAN backups to a DataDomain repository (typically an NFS mount). By leveraging some data movement tech within the array in combination with RMAN Block Change Tracking, you can have incremental backups indefinitely. Downside to this is if your database is encrypted, you'll lose out on the de-duplication of the DataDomain (but it's great not having tape). Option 3 If you are using NetApp FAS storage, you can leverage Snapshot Snapvault technology to perform incremental backups at the array level. High level it works like this- Hotbackupmode, snapshot primary storage, out of hotbackupmode, incremental snapvault update from primary array to secondary array, snapshot on secondary array. Downside is you need another array but it is probably cheaper disk (1TB SATA or greater) but upside is traffic is between arrays and no tape. You can also retain the data for longer on the secondary array where your cheaper disk is. You'll notice options 2 3 don't even use NBU at all - there are a few use cases that NBU can't address. Just suggesting you don't limit your solution assessment to NBU only. From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu [mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Simon Weaver Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2012 01:36 To: stefanos; Mark Phillips; jcr...@marketforce.com.au Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB Oracle is on here as well :-( _ From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu on behalf of stefanos Sent: Thu 12/04/2012 08:38 To: 'Mark Phillips'; jcr...@marketforce.com.au; Simon Weaver Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB I agree that synthetic backups are good, but only if you run file backups. If the system has an oracle, the synthetic backups are useless. From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu [mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Mark Phillips Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2012 3:56 AM To: jcr...@marketforce.com.au; Simon Weaver Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB I agree. We use synthetic fulls quite a bit. They work really well for large filesystems that have relatively small incremental backups. If you're going to tape you'll need at least 2 free tape drives for the duration of the synthetic full backup, one for the last full backup and the other for the one you're constructing. Also it's best if you're able to send incremental backups to staging disk and they remain on the staging disk when the synthetic full is being constructed, it saves on tape loading and positioning time. If the incremental backups are going to tape avoid multiplexing them, it'll slow things down. Also if you're going to tape when doing the first conventional full backup don't multiplex it - this will make doing the first synthetic full backup slow. Mark From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu [mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of jcr...@marketforce.com.au Sent: Thursday, 12 April 2012 9:57 AM To: Simon Weaver Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB I would look at synthetics ... not quite as large
Re: [Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB
Hello Simon check that you are not running file backup of an open oracle database, this will always be slow and often not usable for recovery of the database If you are using rman use multiple channels, we have found here that about 3 channels is best for our gigabit. Also you can play with NET_BUFFER_SZ, we are running with 512KB at the moment And there probably are some tuning that can be done in the linux tcp if the underlying ESX host can handle it Hope this helps Regards Michael 2012/4/12 Simon Weaver simon.wea...@iscl.net: Oracle is on here as well :-( From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu on behalf of stefanos Sent: Thu 12/04/2012 08:38 To: 'Mark Phillips'; jcr...@marketforce.com.au; Simon Weaver Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB I agree that synthetic backups are good, but only if you run file backups. If the system has an oracle, the synthetic backups are useless. From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu [mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Mark Phillips Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2012 3:56 AM To: jcr...@marketforce.com.au; Simon Weaver Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB I agree. We use synthetic fulls quite a bit. They work really well for large filesystems that have relatively small incremental backups. If you’re going to tape you’ll need at least 2 free tape drives for the duration of the synthetic full backup, one for the last full backup and the other for the one you’re constructing. Also it’s best if you’re able to send incremental backups to staging disk and they remain on the staging disk when the synthetic full is being constructed, it saves on tape loading and positioning time. If the incremental backups are going to tape avoid multiplexing them, it’ll slow things down. Also if you’re going to tape when doing the first conventional full backup don’t multiplex it – this will make doing the first synthetic full backup slow. Mark From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu [mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of jcr...@marketforce.com.au Sent: Thursday, 12 April 2012 9:57 AM To: Simon Weaver Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB I would look at synthetics ... not quite as large as you, but I backup around 8TBs on one linux (RHEL 4) server over the weekend (every weekend) and it completes in well under 24 hours. (About 16-20 hours from memory) The very first backup has to be a full, but once that is out of the way, you should be able to do a full synthetic every weekend in well under 48 hours (I'm going on what I have above so is just a guess - you may be much faster than my infrastructure as its nothing flash ... though it is completely gigabit) I should add that I've been using synthetics on this particular server for around 4.5 years now, and they are reliable and fast - unless you have to re-seed the synthetic with an initial full backup; I have had a few go bad such that I have had to re-seed the backup, but that's been rare and only happened 2-3 times in all that time. HIGHLY recommended for large backups. Cheers Crowey From: Simon Weaver simon.wea...@iscl.net To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu, Date: 11/04/2012 09:16 PM Subject: [Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB Sent by: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu All I am hoping you can help Im not too familiar with Linux, but we have a RedHat Box, that is a VM Guest on an ESX Host, that has RDM's totalling 14TB The backups are done over the LAN - Painfully slow as you can imagine. Im wondering what options I have in terms of trying to improve performance for this client. So far its taking close to 3 days to run. It is on a 1GB Network, as I understand. But does anyone have any suggestions? Thanks, Si___ 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] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB
Hi, You can go for 1. NDMP If possible. 2. SAN Client Backup. 3. Use the Netapps Appliance Or share your storage environment and lets see what are the other options u have. With Warm Regards Harpreet From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu [mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Simon Weaver Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2012 9:16 PM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB All I am hoping you can help Im not too familiar with Linux, but we have a RedHat Box, that is a VM Guest on an ESX Host, that has RDM's totalling 14TB The backups are done over the LAN - Painfully slow as you can imagine. Im wondering what options I have in terms of trying to improve performance for this client. So far its taking close to 3 days to run. It is on a 1GB Network, as I understand. But does anyone have any suggestions? Thanks, Si Legal Disclaimer: The information contained in this message may be privileged and confidential. It is intended to be read only by the individual or entity to whom it is addressed or by their designee. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are on notice that any distribution of this message, in any form, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please immediately notify the sender and delete or destroy any copy of this message ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB
I agree that synthetic backups are good, but only if you run file backups. If the system has an oracle, the synthetic backups are useless. From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu [mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Mark Phillips Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2012 3:56 AM To: jcr...@marketforce.com.au; Simon Weaver Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB I agree. We use synthetic fulls quite a bit. They work really well for large filesystems that have relatively small incremental backups. If you're going to tape you'll need at least 2 free tape drives for the duration of the synthetic full backup, one for the last full backup and the other for the one you're constructing. Also it's best if you're able to send incremental backups to staging disk and they remain on the staging disk when the synthetic full is being constructed, it saves on tape loading and positioning time. If the incremental backups are going to tape avoid multiplexing them, it'll slow things down. Also if you're going to tape when doing the first conventional full backup don't multiplex it - this will make doing the first synthetic full backup slow. Mark From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu [mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of jcr...@marketforce.com.au Sent: Thursday, 12 April 2012 9:57 AM To: Simon Weaver Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB I would look at synthetics ... not quite as large as you, but I backup around 8TBs on one linux (RHEL 4) server over the weekend (every weekend) and it completes in well under 24 hours. (About 16-20 hours from memory) The very first backup has to be a full, but once that is out of the way, you should be able to do a full synthetic every weekend in well under 48 hours (I'm going on what I have above so is just a guess - you may be much faster than my infrastructure as its nothing flash ... though it is completely gigabit) I should add that I've been using synthetics on this particular server for around 4.5 years now, and they are reliable and fast - unless you have to re-seed the synthetic with an initial full backup; I have had a few go bad such that I have had to re-seed the backup, but that's been rare and only happened 2-3 times in all that time. HIGHLY recommended for large backups. Cheers Crowey From:Simon Weaver simon.wea...@iscl.net To:veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu, Date:11/04/2012 09:16 PM Subject:[Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB Sent by:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu _ All I am hoping you can help Im not too familiar with Linux, but we have a RedHat Box, that is a VM Guest on an ESX Host, that has RDM's totalling 14TB The backups are done over the LAN - Painfully slow as you can imagine. Im wondering what options I have in terms of trying to improve performance for this client. So far its taking close to 3 days to run. It is on a 1GB Network, as I understand. But does anyone have any suggestions? Thanks, Si___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu 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] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB
Oracle is on here as well :-( From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu on behalf of stefanos Sent: Thu 12/04/2012 08:38 To: 'Mark Phillips'; jcr...@marketforce.com.au; Simon Weaver Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB I agree that synthetic backups are good, but only if you run file backups. If the system has an oracle, the synthetic backups are useless. From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu [mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Mark Phillips Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2012 3:56 AM To: jcr...@marketforce.com.au; Simon Weaver Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB I agree. We use synthetic fulls quite a bit. They work really well for large filesystems that have relatively small incremental backups. If you're going to tape you'll need at least 2 free tape drives for the duration of the synthetic full backup, one for the last full backup and the other for the one you're constructing. Also it's best if you're able to send incremental backups to staging disk and they remain on the staging disk when the synthetic full is being constructed, it saves on tape loading and positioning time. If the incremental backups are going to tape avoid multiplexing them, it'll slow things down. Also if you're going to tape when doing the first conventional full backup don't multiplex it - this will make doing the first synthetic full backup slow. Mark From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu [mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of jcr...@marketforce.com.au Sent: Thursday, 12 April 2012 9:57 AM To: Simon Weaver Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB I would look at synthetics ... not quite as large as you, but I backup around 8TBs on one linux (RHEL 4) server over the weekend (every weekend) and it completes in well under 24 hours. (About 16-20 hours from memory) The very first backup has to be a full, but once that is out of the way, you should be able to do a full synthetic every weekend in well under 48 hours (I'm going on what I have above so is just a guess - you may be much faster than my infrastructure as its nothing flash ... though it is completely gigabit) I should add that I've been using synthetics on this particular server for around 4.5 years now, and they are reliable and fast - unless you have to re-seed the synthetic with an initial full backup; I have had a few go bad such that I have had to re-seed the backup, but that's been rare and only happened 2-3 times in all that time. HIGHLY recommended for large backups. Cheers Crowey From:Simon Weaver simon.wea...@iscl.net To:veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu, Date:11/04/2012 09:16 PM Subject:[Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB Sent by:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu All I am hoping you can help Im not too familiar with Linux, but we have a RedHat Box, that is a VM Guest on an ESX Host, that has RDM's totalling 14TB The backups are done over the LAN - Painfully slow as you can imagine. Im wondering what options I have in terms of trying to improve performance for this client. So far its taking close to 3 days to run. It is on a 1GB Network, as I understand. But does anyone have any suggestions? Thanks, Si___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu 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] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB
Stefanos You mentioned Snapshots earlier and mounting to another Media Server, but I take it I would have to implement a Media Server of Linux in order to do this? S. From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu on behalf of stefanos Sent: Thu 12/04/2012 08:38 To: 'Mark Phillips'; jcr...@marketforce.com.au; Simon Weaver Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB I agree that synthetic backups are good, but only if you run file backups. If the system has an oracle, the synthetic backups are useless. From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu [mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Mark Phillips Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2012 3:56 AM To: jcr...@marketforce.com.au; Simon Weaver Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB I agree. We use synthetic fulls quite a bit. They work really well for large filesystems that have relatively small incremental backups. If you're going to tape you'll need at least 2 free tape drives for the duration of the synthetic full backup, one for the last full backup and the other for the one you're constructing. Also it's best if you're able to send incremental backups to staging disk and they remain on the staging disk when the synthetic full is being constructed, it saves on tape loading and positioning time. If the incremental backups are going to tape avoid multiplexing them, it'll slow things down. Also if you're going to tape when doing the first conventional full backup don't multiplex it - this will make doing the first synthetic full backup slow. Mark From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu [mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of jcr...@marketforce.com.au Sent: Thursday, 12 April 2012 9:57 AM To: Simon Weaver Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB I would look at synthetics ... not quite as large as you, but I backup around 8TBs on one linux (RHEL 4) server over the weekend (every weekend) and it completes in well under 24 hours. (About 16-20 hours from memory) The very first backup has to be a full, but once that is out of the way, you should be able to do a full synthetic every weekend in well under 48 hours (I'm going on what I have above so is just a guess - you may be much faster than my infrastructure as its nothing flash ... though it is completely gigabit) I should add that I've been using synthetics on this particular server for around 4.5 years now, and they are reliable and fast - unless you have to re-seed the synthetic with an initial full backup; I have had a few go bad such that I have had to re-seed the backup, but that's been rare and only happened 2-3 times in all that time. HIGHLY recommended for large backups. Cheers Crowey From:Simon Weaver simon.wea...@iscl.net To:veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu, Date:11/04/2012 09:16 PM Subject:[Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB Sent by:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu All I am hoping you can help Im not too familiar with Linux, but we have a RedHat Box, that is a VM Guest on an ESX Host, that has RDM's totalling 14TB The backups are done over the LAN - Painfully slow as you can imagine. Im wondering what options I have in terms of trying to improve performance for this client. So far its taking close to 3 days to run. It is on a 1GB Network, as I understand. But does anyone have any suggestions? Thanks, Si___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu 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] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB
Yes, you need a Linux media server to read the file system. From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu [mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Simon Weaver Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2012 11:36 AM To: stefanos; Mark Phillips; jcr...@marketforce.com.au Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB Stefanos You mentioned Snapshots earlier and mounting to another Media Server, but I take it I would have to implement a Media Server of Linux in order to do this? S. _ From: mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu on behalf of stefanos Sent: Thu 12/04/2012 08:38 To: 'Mark Phillips'; mailto:jcr...@marketforce.com.au jcr...@marketforce.com.au; Simon Weaver Cc: mailto:veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB I agree that synthetic backups are good, but only if you run file backups. If the system has an oracle, the synthetic backups are useless. From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu [mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Mark Phillips Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2012 3:56 AM To: jcr...@marketforce.com.au; Simon Weaver Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB I agree. We use synthetic fulls quite a bit. They work really well for large filesystems that have relatively small incremental backups. If you're going to tape you'll need at least 2 free tape drives for the duration of the synthetic full backup, one for the last full backup and the other for the one you're constructing. Also it's best if you're able to send incremental backups to staging disk and they remain on the staging disk when the synthetic full is being constructed, it saves on tape loading and positioning time. If the incremental backups are going to tape avoid multiplexing them, it'll slow things down. Also if you're going to tape when doing the first conventional full backup don't multiplex it - this will make doing the first synthetic full backup slow. Mark From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu [mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of jcr...@marketforce.com.au Sent: Thursday, 12 April 2012 9:57 AM To: Simon Weaver Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB I would look at synthetics ... not quite as large as you, but I backup around 8TBs on one linux (RHEL 4) server over the weekend (every weekend) and it completes in well under 24 hours. (About 16-20 hours from memory) The very first backup has to be a full, but once that is out of the way, you should be able to do a full synthetic every weekend in well under 48 hours (I'm going on what I have above so is just a guess - you may be much faster than my infrastructure as its nothing flash ... though it is completely gigabit) I should add that I've been using synthetics on this particular server for around 4.5 years now, and they are reliable and fast - unless you have to re-seed the synthetic with an initial full backup; I have had a few go bad such that I have had to re-seed the backup, but that's been rare and only happened 2-3 times in all that time. HIGHLY recommended for large backups. Cheers Crowey From:Simon Weaver simon.wea...@iscl.net To:veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu, Date:11/04/2012 09:16 PM Subject:[Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB Sent by:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu _ All I am hoping you can help Im not too familiar with Linux, but we have a RedHat Box, that is a VM Guest on an ESX Host, that has RDM's totalling 14TB The backups are done over the LAN - Painfully slow as you can imagine. Im wondering what options I have in terms of trying to improve performance for this client. So far its taking close to 3 days to run. It is on a 1GB Network, as I understand. But does anyone have any suggestions? Thanks, Si___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu 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] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB
You can backup Oracle “files” so long as the DB is down. The question is how long can you keep your DB down? Really for a system this large especially if it allows for limited downtime your company needs to invest in the infrastructure to back it up properly. Either put fibre HBAs in the server and make it a media server itself or make disk copies (EMC BCVs, Hitachi Shadow Image etc…) to mount on a different media server and backup those copies. Ideally you’d do both which would allow you to do your daily backup using the disk copies but then use the original server itself as the media server during a restore. Remember the most important part of backups is not the backing up but rather the time to restore when you need the backup. From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu [mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Simon Weaver Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2012 4:36 AM To: stefanos; Mark Phillips; jcr...@marketforce.com.au Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB Oracle is on here as well :-( From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu on behalf of stefanos Sent: Thu 12/04/2012 08:38 To: 'Mark Phillips'; jcr...@marketforce.com.au; Simon Weaver Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB I agree that synthetic backups are good, but only if you run file backups. If the system has an oracle, the synthetic backups are useless. From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu [mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Mark Phillips Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2012 3:56 AM To: jcr...@marketforce.com.au; Simon Weaver Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB I agree. We use synthetic fulls quite a bit. They work really well for large filesystems that have relatively small incremental backups. If you’re going to tape you’ll need at least 2 free tape drives for the duration of the synthetic full backup, one for the last full backup and the other for the one you’re constructing. Also it’s best if you’re able to send incremental backups to staging disk and they remain on the staging disk when the synthetic full is being constructed, it saves on tape loading and positioning time. If the incremental backups are going to tape avoid multiplexing them, it’ll slow things down. Also if you’re going to tape when doing the first conventional full backup don’t multiplex it – this will make doing the first synthetic full backup slow. Mark From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edumailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu [mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of jcr...@marketforce.com.aumailto:jcr...@marketforce.com.au Sent: Thursday, 12 April 2012 9:57 AM To: Simon Weaver Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edumailto:veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edumailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB I would look at synthetics ... not quite as large as you, but I backup around 8TBs on one linux (RHEL 4) server over the weekend (every weekend) and it completes in well under 24 hours. (About 16-20 hours from memory) The very first backup has to be a full, but once that is out of the way, you should be able to do a full synthetic every weekend in well under 48 hours (I'm going on what I have above so is just a guess - you may be much faster than my infrastructure as its nothing flash ... though it is completely gigabit) I should add that I've been using synthetics on this particular server for around 4.5 years now, and they are reliable and fast - unless you have to re-seed the synthetic with an initial full backup; I have had a few go bad such that I have had to re-seed the backup, but that's been rare and only happened 2-3 times in all that time. HIGHLY recommended for large backups. Cheers Crowey From:Simon Weaver simon.wea...@iscl.netmailto:simon.wea...@iscl.net To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edumailto:veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu, Date:11/04/2012 09:16 PM Subject:[Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB Sent by: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edumailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu All I am hoping you can help Im not too familiar with Linux, but we have a RedHat Box, that is a VM Guest on an ESX Host, that has RDM's totalling 14TB The backups are done over the LAN - Painfully slow as you can imagine. Im wondering what options I have in terms of trying to improve performance for this client. So far its taking close to 3
Re: [Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB
Few different solution options I can think of. I don't know what your underlying disk array tech is so I'm going to mention things I have experience with - maybe they'll work for you, maybe not... Option 1 Leverage underlying disk array technology to move data around. In the case of EMC you might consider BCVs that can incrementally update data to completely separate disks. You would only need to quiesce Oracle (hotbackupmode) for minutes or less while you split off the BCVs and then import/mount them on a media server that could then spin to tape. Downside to this is that in the case of Oracle, most files get modified and captured by NBU even if only a small amount of change occurred within. Option 2 Use Oracle RMAN with the DataDomain Incremental Merge option. This involves a one-time full and indefinite incremental RMAN backups to a DataDomain repository (typically an NFS mount). By leveraging some data movement tech within the array in combination with RMAN Block Change Tracking, you can have incremental backups indefinitely. Downside to this is if your database is encrypted, you'll lose out on the de-duplication of the DataDomain (but it's great not having tape). Option 3 If you are using NetApp FAS storage, you can leverage Snapshot Snapvault technology to perform incremental backups at the array level. High level it works like this- Hotbackupmode, snapshot primary storage, out of hotbackupmode, incremental snapvault update from primary array to secondary array, snapshot on secondary array. Downside is you need another array but it is probably cheaper disk (1TB SATA or greater) but upside is traffic is between arrays and no tape. You can also retain the data for longer on the secondary array where your cheaper disk is. You'll notice options 2 3 don't even use NBU at all - there are a few use cases that NBU can't address. Just suggesting you don't limit your solution assessment to NBU only. From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu [mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Simon Weaver Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2012 01:36 To: stefanos; Mark Phillips; jcr...@marketforce.com.au Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB Oracle is on here as well :-( From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu on behalf of stefanos Sent: Thu 12/04/2012 08:38 To: 'Mark Phillips'; jcr...@marketforce.com.au; Simon Weaver Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB I agree that synthetic backups are good, but only if you run file backups. If the system has an oracle, the synthetic backups are useless. From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu [mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Mark Phillips Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2012 3:56 AM To: jcr...@marketforce.com.au; Simon Weaver Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB I agree. We use synthetic fulls quite a bit. They work really well for large filesystems that have relatively small incremental backups. If you're going to tape you'll need at least 2 free tape drives for the duration of the synthetic full backup, one for the last full backup and the other for the one you're constructing. Also it's best if you're able to send incremental backups to staging disk and they remain on the staging disk when the synthetic full is being constructed, it saves on tape loading and positioning time. If the incremental backups are going to tape avoid multiplexing them, it'll slow things down. Also if you're going to tape when doing the first conventional full backup don't multiplex it - this will make doing the first synthetic full backup slow. Mark From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edumailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu [mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of jcr...@marketforce.com.aumailto:jcr...@marketforce.com.au Sent: Thursday, 12 April 2012 9:57 AM To: Simon Weaver Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edumailto:veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edumailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB I would look at synthetics ... not quite as large as you, but I backup around 8TBs on one linux (RHEL 4) server over the weekend (every weekend) and it completes in well under 24 hours. (About 16-20 hours from memory) The very first backup has to be a full, but once that is out of the way, you should be able to do a full synthetic every weekend in well under 48 hours (I'm going on what I have above so is just a guess - you may be much faster than my infrastructure as its nothing flash ... though
Re: [Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB
I don't (necessarily) see a problem here. My file system is some 16TB large, it is mostly just a standard file system, but it also has an area dedicated to a MySQL database - our 8TB synthetic only backs-up part of this filesystem, ignoring the MySQL database folders and some other, non-important folders. Depending on how your volume/s are configured, there's nothing stopping you configuring a synthetic backup that incorporates only those root level (or even deeper) folders/directories that you want to backup this way and ignoring the rest. Of course I don't know your volume folder structure but its certainly possible (we do it), and its very efficient. And you can then have a separate backup for your Oracle db; indeed you could have a couple or more synthetics if there's a natural way to break it up. PS If your Oracle dba/s would/can configure the database to backup to file/s then you don't have to worry about shutting down the database, and you can incorporate the files in your synthetic backup scheduling. We don't backup our MySQL database at all, but the backups to file are. From: Simon Weaver simon.wea...@iscl.net To: stefanos sm...@peppas.gr, Mark Phillips mark.phill...@unisa.edu.au, jcr...@marketforce.com.au, Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu, veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Date: 12/04/2012 04:36 PM Subject:Re: [Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB Sent by:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Oracle is on here as well :-( From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu on behalf of stefanos Sent: Thu 12/04/2012 08:38 To: 'Mark Phillips'; jcr...@marketforce.com.au; Simon Weaver Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB I agree that synthetic backups are good, but only if you run file backups. If the system has an oracle, the synthetic backups are useless. From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu [ mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Mark Phillips Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2012 3:56 AM To: jcr...@marketforce.com.au; Simon Weaver Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB I agree. We use synthetic fulls quite a bit. They work really well for large filesystems that have relatively small incremental backups. If you’re going to tape you’ll need at least 2 free tape drives for the duration of the synthetic full backup, one for the last full backup and the other for the one you’re constructing. Also it’s best if you’re able to send incremental backups to staging disk and they remain on the staging disk when the synthetic full is being constructed, it saves on tape loading and positioning time. If the incremental backups are going to tape avoid multiplexing them, it’ll slow things down. Also if you’re going to tape when doing the first conventional full backup don’t multiplex it – this will make doing the first synthetic full backup slow. Mark From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu [ mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of jcr...@marketforce.com.au Sent: Thursday, 12 April 2012 9:57 AM To: Simon Weaver Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB I would look at synthetics ... not quite as large as you, but I backup around 8TBs on one linux (RHEL 4) server over the weekend (every weekend) and it completes in well under 24 hours. (About 16-20 hours from memory) The very first backup has to be a full, but once that is out of the way, you should be able to do a full synthetic every weekend in well under 48 hours (I'm going on what I have above so is just a guess - you may be much faster than my infrastructure as its nothing flash ... though it is completely gigabit) I should add that I've been using synthetics on this particular server for around 4.5 years now, and they are reliable and fast - unless you have to re-seed the synthetic with an initial full backup; I have had a few go bad such that I have had to re-seed the backup, but that's been rare and only happened 2-3 times in all that time. HIGHLY recommended for large backups. Cheers Crowey From:Simon Weaver simon.wea...@iscl.net To:veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu, Date:11/04/2012 09:16 PM Subject:[Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB Sent by:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu All I am hoping you can help Im not too familiar with Linux, but we have a RedHat Box, that is a VM Guest on an ESX Host, that has RDM's totalling 14TB The backups are done over the LAN - Painfully slow as you can imagine. Im wondering what options I have in terms of trying to improve performance
[Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB
All I am hoping you can help Im not too familiar with Linux, but we have a RedHat Box, that is a VM Guest on an ESX Host, that has RDM's totalling 14TB The backups are done over the LAN - Painfully slow as you can imagine. Im wondering what options I have in terms of trying to improve performance for this client. So far its taking close to 3 days to run. It is on a 1GB Network, as I understand. But does anyone have any suggestions? Thanks, Si ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB
Hello Simon, Check if the DRMs are in virtual compatibility. If they are, you can use snapshots. Check the compatibility and VMware manuals. If not, you can use the storage snapshot to create a snapshot and mount it to a media server. You have to be sour that the application is backup aware (backup mode). stefanos From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu [mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Simon Weaver Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2012 4:16 PM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB All I am hoping you can help Im not too familiar with Linux, but we have a RedHat Box, that is a VM Guest on an ESX Host, that has RDM's totalling 14TB The backups are done over the LAN - Painfully slow as you can imagine. Im wondering what options I have in terms of trying to improve performance for this client. So far its taking close to 3 days to run. It is on a 1GB Network, as I understand. But does anyone have any suggestions? Thanks, Si ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB
Hi They are Physical Mode ! Storage Snapshot - Can you explain please? From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu on behalf of stefanos Sent: Wed 11/04/2012 14:53 To: Simon Weaver; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB Hello Simon, Check if the DRMs are in virtual compatibility. If they are, you can use snapshots. Check the compatibility and VMware manuals. If not, you can use the storage snapshot to create a snapshot and mount it to a media server. You have to be sour that the application is backup aware (backup mode). stefanos From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu [mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Simon Weaver Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2012 4:16 PM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB All I am hoping you can help Im not too familiar with Linux, but we have a RedHat Box, that is a VM Guest on an ESX Host, that has RDM's totalling 14TB The backups are done over the LAN - Painfully slow as you can imagine. Im wondering what options I have in terms of trying to improve performance for this client. So far its taking close to 3 days to run. It is on a 1GB Network, as I understand. But does anyone have any suggestions? Thanks, Si ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB
I would look at synthetics ... not quite as large as you, but I backup around 8TBs on one linux (RHEL 4) server over the weekend (every weekend) and it completes in well under 24 hours. (About 16-20 hours from memory) The very first backup has to be a full, but once that is out of the way, you should be able to do a full synthetic every weekend in well under 48 hours (I'm going on what I have above so is just a guess - you may be much faster than my infrastructure as its nothing flash ... though it is completely gigabit) I should add that I've been using synthetics on this particular server for around 4.5 years now, and they are reliable and fast - unless you have to re-seed the synthetic with an initial full backup; I have had a few go bad such that I have had to re-seed the backup, but that's been rare and only happened 2-3 times in all that time. HIGHLY recommended for large backups. Cheers Crowey From: Simon Weaver simon.wea...@iscl.net To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu, Date: 11/04/2012 09:16 PM Subject:[Veritas-bu] Advice Help - Linux Server 14TB Sent by:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu All I am hoping you can help Im not too familiar with Linux, but we have a RedHat Box, that is a VM Guest on an ESX Host, that has RDM's totalling 14TB The backups are done over the LAN - Painfully slow as you can imagine. Im wondering what options I have in terms of trying to improve performance for this client. So far its taking close to 3 days to run. It is on a 1GB Network, as I understand. But does anyone have any suggestions? Thanks, Si___ 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
