Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release?
Yes they were. Most of our backups go to disk, then get duped to tape; several large backups go directly to tape. Ken Zufall Technical Analyst D660C The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company GTN 446.0592 or 330.796.0592 "Rosenkoetter, Gabriel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 08/21/2008 03:30 PM To [EMAIL PROTECTED], "List Veritas List" cc "Ed Wilts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject RE: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release? Were your 5.x media servers making use of tape storage units during the time your environment was mixed mode with a 6.5.1 master server? -- gabriel rosenkoetter Radian Group Inc, Unix/Linux/VMware Sysadmin / Backup & Recovery [EMAIL PROTECTED], 215 231 1556 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2008 2:23 PM To: List Veritas List Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release? Yes, that is correct. When we went to 6.5.1, we upgraded our media servers on subsequent days so we had a mixed environment for a few weeks. Ken Zufall Technical Analyst D660C The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company "Rosenkoetter, Gabriel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 08/21/2008 01:54 PM To "Ed Wilts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc List Veritas List , Dean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release? I'm not quite sure in what way you're correcting me there... just that 6.0 MP1 and MP2 are unsupported? (I didn't know that, and it's good info!) As near as I can tell from that document and http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/290141.htm, NetBackup 5.1 media servers are still supported (in compatibility mode) under 6.5.x. Am I incorrect? -- gabriel rosenkoetter Radian Group Inc, Unix/Linux/VMware Sysadmin / Backup & Recovery [EMAIL PROTECTED], 215 231 1556 From: Ed Wilts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2008 1:47 PM To: Rosenkoetter, Gabriel Cc: Dean; List Veritas List Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release? On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 10:46 AM, Rosenkoetter, Gabriel < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: You probably want your Windows media server at 6.5.2A, if you want it at 6.5 anything. (You are, of course, allowed to just leave it at 5.1, >From the compatibility technote ( http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/264767.htm): A NetBackup 6.5 master server will not support a NetBackup 6.0, 6.0 MP1, or 6.0 MP2 media server that has tape media configured. A change to correct this issue was made in the NetBackup 6.0 MP3 release and was carried forward to NetBackup 6.5. Therefore, Symantec will support 6.0 MP3 media servers or later with NetBackup 6.5 master servers. .../Ed ___ 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] Most recent stable release?
I indeed called in NetBackup support from SUN (formal StorageTek guys) to assist me on this as migrating 1 Master server and 28 Media Servers in 1 go was a bit to much for 1 person. But even with 3 people the migration took 25 hours. Bart WALLEBROEK Swift ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release?
Bart, Did you do the catalog migration yourself? We are looking at a similar migration from dissimilar OS platforms and expected to get Symantec involved. Regards, Paul Esson Redstor Limited -Original Message- From: WALLEBROEK Bart [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 21 August 2008 15:22 To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release? 2 weeks ago we moved over from 5.1 on HP-UX to 6.5.2a on a clustered Windows 2003 R2 32-bit server, 30 Media Servers all migrated as well (in one go) with a mix of Windows, Solaris and HP-UX Media Servers). To be honest I have to say that all went well (catalog migration included) wihout any major issues. First step was to move 5.1 from HP-UX to the Win cluster and I have to say the admin console was somewhat slow afterwards. However once we moved to 6.5.2a the admin console was lighting fast (Windows cluster has 2 Xeon Quad cores with 16GB memory / each node). Last step (next week) is to upgrade to Windows 2003 64-bit. We did not had to install any engineering patch so from my point of view I must say that this version is stable. Bart Wallebroek SWIFT Message: 2 Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 13:11:21 -0400 From: "Rice, Robert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release? To: "veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu" Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Hi all, Just wondering what the consensus is on the most recent stable release of NBU for Solaris 10 using LTO4? Thanks in advance, Bob ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release?
On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 7:15 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > We're setting up a clustered solaris 10 - 6.5.2 test/dev master and I'm > just wondering what EEBs I should > be asking for ? Even if you ask, you won't get them until you can show them you have the bug. We tried and were unsuccessful - it took about 2-3 days to get them to give us the EEBs after giving them the logs. The problem is that they don't want to give out EEBs just to anybody anytime - they really do want to track them and make sure that they're not breaking anything in your environment with a pre-release if they don't have to, and make sure that if you have a problem that they can track the issue and make sure it's the right EEB for you. It makes sense although the delay can be frustrating. .../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] Most recent stable release?
Hi Ed, We're setting up a clustered solaris 10 - 6.5.2 test/dev master and I'm just wondering what EEBs I should be asking for ? thanks, Dominik "Ed Wilts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 22/08/2008 12:49 AM To "Randy Samora" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release? On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 9:25 AM, Randy Samora <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I'm running 6.0 MP5 in a Windows environment and it has been running great. I'm about to go to 6.5.1 and from what I've read, that's a pretty stable ledge to sit on for a little while. However, as I mentioned in another post, the server team wants me to support 2008 Server which isn't supported until 6.5.2. From what I'm reading now, it sounds like I would be safer to downgrade the 2008 Server back to 2003 Server until some issues get resolved witih 6.5.2? 6.5.2A is relatively stable if you apply the relevant EEBs. It's probably less work to upgrade your backup environment to 6.5.2 than it is to rebuild that Windows 2008 server as 2003 (although you will teach the admin a needed lesson :-)). YMMV since everybody's NBU environment is different. .../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 National Australia Bank Ltd - ABN 12 004 044 937 This email may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, please immediately notify us at [EMAIL PROTECTED] or by replying to the sender, and then destroy all copies of this email. Except where this email indicates otherwise, views expressed in this email are those of the sender and not of National Australia Bank Ltd. Advice in this email does not take account of your objectives, financial situation, or needs. It is important for you to consider these matters and, if the e-mail refers to a product(s), you should read the relevant Product Disclosure Statement(s)/other disclosure document(s) before making any decisions. If you do not want email marketing from us in future, forward this email with "unsubscribe" in the subject line to [EMAIL PROTECTED] in order to stop marketing emails from this sender. National Australia Bank Ltd does not represent that this email is free of errors, viruses or interference. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release?
Sure, but Dean's original post described a plan to upgrade his Win2k3
media servers AND move them into his Linux-mastered 6.5.2 environment at
the same time.
My point is that he can actually go ahead and one-step that process
(move in first, then upgrade once bound to the 6.5.2 master), he just
has to be careful not to target the added media server with any 6.5.2
clients. (Unless what you say about disk STUs is true, but I don't
believe that it is: I think that's restricted to 6.0 flat through MP2,
when EMM was just new to the scene. Further back you're in full-on
compat mode, and that still functions with tape.)
--
gabriel rosenkoetter
Radian Group Inc, Unix/Linux/VMware Sysadmin / Backup & Recovery
[EMAIL PROTECTED], 215 231 1556
_
From: Ed Wilts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2008 4:31 PM
To: Rosenkoetter, Gabriel
Cc: Dean; List Veritas List
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release?
On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 2:24 PM, Rosenkoetter, Gabriel
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ed, I don't see where what you've quoted states that, nor do I
see it stated in the relevant documentation myself. The only discussion
of 5.x I see at http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/264767.htm is
under the points specific to NetBackup 6.0 ("A 6.0 master will work with
5.1 and 5.0MP1 (or later) media servers. NetBackup 5.0 Maintenance Pack
1 or later is the minimum required version for a 5.x Media server in a
6.0 environment. See TechNote 278153 for additional details.")
Have you tried yourself and found this limitation?
Nope - we don't keep our master and media servers that far apart with
releases.
The text you quote explicitly avoids mentioning anything below
6.0, but you're saying it applies to prior releases...?
That's the way I interpret it but I could be wrong. In any case, if you
read 290141 that you referenced earlier, it says:
Upgrading 5.x media servers and clients to 6.5.x is an optional step,
although it is strongly recommended.
NetBackup 5.x media servers are supported in a NetBackup 6.5.x
environment. However, clients that are
upgraded to NetBackup 6.5.x cannot be backed up to NetBackup 5.x or 6.0
media servers. In addition, 5.x media
servers and clients will not be supported in the next major release of
NetBackup. Therefore, it is recommended
that you update all 5.x media servers and clients to NetBackup 6.5.x to
avoid compatibility issues.
5.1 has also reached its end of standard support. You could certainly
try a 6.5.x master with a 5.1 media server, but you're pretty much on
your own if you do and you can't back up clients that are newer than 5.1
(remember that media servers have to be at a release newer than the
clients).
.../Ed
___
Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release?
On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 2:24 PM, Rosenkoetter, Gabriel <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ed, I don't see where what you've quoted states that, nor do I see it
> stated in the relevant documentation myself. The only discussion of 5.x I
> see at http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/264767.htm is under the
> points specific to NetBackup 6.0 ("A 6.0 master will work with 5.1 and
> 5.0MP1 (or later) media servers. NetBackup 5.0 Maintenance Pack 1 or later
> is the minimum required version for a 5.x Media server in a 6.0 environment.
> See TechNote 278153 for additional details.")
>
> Have you tried yourself and found this limitation?
>
Nope - we don't keep our master and media servers that far apart with
releases.
> The text you quote explicitly avoids mentioning anything below 6.0, but
> you're saying it applies to prior releases...?
>
That's the way I interpret it but I could be wrong. In any case, if you
read 290141 that you referenced earlier, it says:
Upgrading 5.x media servers and clients to 6.5.x is an optional step,
although it is strongly recommended.
NetBackup 5.x media servers are supported in a NetBackup 6.5.x environment.
However, clients that are
upgraded to NetBackup 6.5.x cannot be backed up to NetBackup 5.x or 6.0
media servers. In addition, 5.x media
servers and clients will not be supported in the next major release of
NetBackup. Therefore, it is recommended
that you update all 5.x media servers and clients to NetBackup 6.5.x to
avoid compatibility issues.
5.1 has also reached its end of standard support. You could certainly try a
6.5.x master with a 5.1 media server, but you're pretty much on your own if
you do and you can't back up clients that are newer than 5.1 (remember that
media servers have to be at a release newer than the clients).
.../Ed
___
Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release?
Were your 5.x media servers making use of tape storage units during the time your environment was mixed mode with a 6.5.1 master server? -- gabriel rosenkoetter Radian Group Inc, Unix/Linux/VMware Sysadmin / Backup & Recovery [EMAIL PROTECTED], 215 231 1556 _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2008 2:23 PM To: List Veritas List Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release? Yes, that is correct. When we went to 6.5.1, we upgraded our media servers on subsequent days so we had a mixed environment for a few weeks. Ken Zufall Technical Analyst D660C The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company "Rosenkoetter, Gabriel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 08/21/2008 01:54 PM To "Ed Wilts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc List Veritas List , Dean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release? I'm not quite sure in what way you're correcting me there... just that 6.0 MP1 and MP2 are unsupported? (I didn't know that, and it's good info!) As near as I can tell from that document and http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/290141.htm <http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/290141.htm> , NetBackup 5.1 media servers are still supported (in compatibility mode) under 6.5.x. Am I incorrect? -- gabriel rosenkoetter Radian Group Inc, Unix/Linux/VMware Sysadmin / Backup & Recovery [EMAIL PROTECTED], 215 231 1556 _ From: Ed Wilts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2008 1:47 PM To: Rosenkoetter, Gabriel Cc: Dean; List Veritas List Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release? On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 10:46 AM, Rosenkoetter, Gabriel <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: You probably want your Windows media server at 6.5.2A, if you want it at 6.5 anything. (You are, of course, allowed to just leave it at 5.1, >From the compatibility technote (http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/264767.htm <http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/264767.htm> ): A NetBackup 6.5 master server will not support a NetBackup 6.0, 6.0 MP1, or 6.0 MP2 media server that has tape media configured. A change to correct this issue was made in the NetBackup 6.0 MP3 release and was carried forward to NetBackup 6.5. Therefore, Symantec will support 6.0 MP3 media servers or later with NetBackup 6.5 master servers. .../Ed ___ 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] Most recent stable release?
Ed, I don't see where what you've quoted states that, nor do I see it
stated in the relevant documentation myself. The only discussion of 5.x
I see at http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/264767.htm is under
the points specific to NetBackup 6.0 ("A 6.0 master will work with 5.1
and 5.0MP1 (or later) media servers. NetBackup 5.0 Maintenance Pack 1
or later is the minimum required version for a 5.x Media server in a 6.0
environment. See TechNote 278153 for additional details.")
Have you tried yourself and found this limitation?
The text you quote explicitly avoids mentioning anything below 6.0, but
you're saying it applies to prior releases...?
--
gabriel rosenkoetter
Radian Group Inc, Unix/Linux/VMware Sysadmin / Backup & Recovery
[EMAIL PROTECTED], 215 231 1556
_
From: Ed Wilts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2008 3:08 PM
To: Rosenkoetter, Gabriel
Cc: Dean; List Veritas List
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release?
On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 12:54 PM, Rosenkoetter, Gabriel
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm not quite sure in what way you're correcting me there...
just that 6.0 MP1 and MP2 are unsupported? (I didn't know that, and it's
good info!)
As near as I can tell from that document and
http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/290141.htm, NetBackup 5.1 media
servers are still supported (in compatibility mode) under 6.5.x. Am I
incorrect?
5.1 media servers are only supported if you're using disk. If you're
using tape, you must be at least at 6.0MP3.
_
From: Ed Wilts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2008 1:47 PM
To: Rosenkoetter, Gabriel
Cc: Dean; List Veritas List
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release?
On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 10:46 AM, Rosenkoetter, Gabriel
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
You probably want your Windows media server at 6.5.2A,
if you want it at 6.5 anything. (You are, of course, allowed to just
leave it at 5.1,
From the compatibility technote
(http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/264767.htm):
A NetBackup 6.5 master server will not support a
NetBackup 6.0, 6.0 MP1, or 6.0 MP2 media server that has tape media
configured. A change to correct this issue was made in the NetBackup 6.0
MP3 release and was carried forward to NetBackup 6.5. Therefore,
Symantec will support 6.0 MP3 media servers or later with NetBackup 6.5
master servers.
.../Ed
.../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] Most recent stable release?
On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 12:54 PM, Rosenkoetter, Gabriel < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm not quite sure in what way you're correcting me there... just that > 6.0 MP1 and MP2 are unsupported? (I didn't know that, and it's good info!) > > As near as I can tell from that document and > http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/290141.htm, NetBackup 5.1 media > servers are still supported (in compatibility mode) under 6.5.x. Am I > incorrect? > 5.1 media servers are only supported if you're using disk. If you're using tape, you must be at least at 6.0MP3. > -- > *From:* Ed Wilts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > *Sent:* Thursday, August 21, 2008 1:47 PM > *To:* Rosenkoetter, Gabriel > *Cc:* Dean; List Veritas List > *Subject:* Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release? > > On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 10:46 AM, Rosenkoetter, Gabriel < > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> You probably want your Windows media server at 6.5.2A, if you want it at >> 6.5 anything. (You are, of course, allowed to just leave it at 5.1, >> > > From the compatibility technote ( > http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/264767.htm): > > A NetBackup 6.5 master server will not support a NetBackup 6.0, 6.0 MP1, or > 6.0 MP2 media server that has tape media configured. A change to correct > this issue was made in the NetBackup 6.0 MP3 release and was carried forward > to NetBackup 6.5. Therefore, Symantec will support 6.0 MP3 media servers or > later with NetBackup 6.5 master servers. > > > >.../Ed > > .../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] Most recent stable release?
Yes, that is correct. When we went to 6.5.1, we upgraded our media servers on subsequent days so we had a mixed environment for a few weeks. Ken Zufall Technical Analyst D660C The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company "Rosenkoetter, Gabriel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 08/21/2008 01:54 PM To "Ed Wilts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc List Veritas List , Dean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release? I'm not quite sure in what way you're correcting me there... just that 6.0 MP1 and MP2 are unsupported? (I didn't know that, and it's good info!) As near as I can tell from that document and http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/290141.htm, NetBackup 5.1 media servers are still supported (in compatibility mode) under 6.5.x. Am I incorrect? -- gabriel rosenkoetter Radian Group Inc, Unix/Linux/VMware Sysadmin / Backup & Recovery [EMAIL PROTECTED], 215 231 1556 From: Ed Wilts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2008 1:47 PM To: Rosenkoetter, Gabriel Cc: Dean; List Veritas List Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release? On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 10:46 AM, Rosenkoetter, Gabriel < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: You probably want your Windows media server at 6.5.2A, if you want it at 6.5 anything. (You are, of course, allowed to just leave it at 5.1, >From the compatibility technote ( http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/264767.htm): A NetBackup 6.5 master server will not support a NetBackup 6.0, 6.0 MP1, or 6.0 MP2 media server that has tape media configured. A change to correct this issue was made in the NetBackup 6.0 MP3 release and was carried forward to NetBackup 6.5. Therefore, Symantec will support 6.0 MP3 media servers or later with NetBackup 6.5 master servers. .../Ed ___ 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] Most recent stable release?
I'm not quite sure in what way you're correcting me there... just that 6.0 MP1 and MP2 are unsupported? (I didn't know that, and it's good info!) As near as I can tell from that document and http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/290141.htm, NetBackup 5.1 media servers are still supported (in compatibility mode) under 6.5.x. Am I incorrect? -- gabriel rosenkoetter Radian Group Inc, Unix/Linux/VMware Sysadmin / Backup & Recovery [EMAIL PROTECTED], 215 231 1556 _ From: Ed Wilts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2008 1:47 PM To: Rosenkoetter, Gabriel Cc: Dean; List Veritas List Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release? On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 10:46 AM, Rosenkoetter, Gabriel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: You probably want your Windows media server at 6.5.2A, if you want it at 6.5 anything. (You are, of course, allowed to just leave it at 5.1, >From the compatibility technote (http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/264767.htm): A NetBackup 6.5 master server will not support a NetBackup 6.0, 6.0 MP1, or 6.0 MP2 media server that has tape media configured. A change to correct this issue was made in the NetBackup 6.0 MP3 release and was carried forward to NetBackup 6.5. Therefore, Symantec will support 6.0 MP3 media servers or later with NetBackup 6.5 master servers. .../Ed ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release?
On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 10:46 AM, Rosenkoetter, Gabriel < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You probably want your Windows media server at 6.5.2A, if you want it at > 6.5 anything. (You are, of course, allowed to just leave it at 5.1, > >From the compatibility technote ( http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/264767.htm): A NetBackup 6.5 master server will not support a NetBackup 6.0, 6.0 MP1, or 6.0 MP2 media server that has tape media configured. A change to correct this issue was made in the NetBackup 6.0 MP3 release and was carried forward to NetBackup 6.5. Therefore, Symantec will support 6.0 MP3 media servers or later with NetBackup 6.5 master servers. .../Ed ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release?
Good discussion, as I am looking at "MIGRATION" from 5.1 Server to NEW Server 6.5.2 My onyl concerns I have in the back of my head is how to move a Media Server that is on 5.1 over to 6.5.2 Anyone done a migration from an old system to a new one? Not too worried about the old robot or catalog, as this is all being replaced. If need be, I will have to import. Some systems are SQL, Oracle based online media servers Thanks, Simon -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin, Jonathan Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2008 5:35 PM Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release? Yeah! Cheap shots at Symantec are reserved for those of us who have spent many restless nights fighting Netbackup. =P Just my .02 - Migrated several Windows 2000 5.1 environments to 6.0 MP4 and then to 6.5.1, 6.5.2 and 6.5.2a. Although there have been issues, I've only had to apply one engineering binary to one environment that had an issue with calendar backups. Maybe I'm just lucky (or maybe Symantec doesn't test on Non-Windows OS =P) but from my experience I think 5.1, 6.0 MP4, 6.51+ are all stable products. -Jonathan From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Ed Wilts Sent: Thu 8/21/2008 7:46 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release? On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 6:04 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Watch out for this one with 6.5.1 on Windows: http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/301175.htm The technote says that this is fixed in 6.5.2. <http://6.5.2./> Right now I'm caught between that one and the completely broken 6.5.2A - http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/305609.htm The technote says that there's an EEB available for this. 6.5.2A is *NOT completely broken. Many years, us included, are running it in full production. You'd think they'd test this stuff before release by ,say, trying to run a backup or something... This has been discussed before. Your comment is unwarranted and low shots like this don't encourage Symantec employees or other users to help you. .../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 This email (including any attachments) may contain confidential and/or privileged information or information otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately, do not copy this message or any attachments and do not use it for any purpose or disclose its content to any person, but delete this message and any attachments from your system. Astrium disclaims any and all liability if this email transmission was virus corrupted, altered or falsified. - Astrium Limited, Registered in England and Wales No. 2449259 REGISTERED OFFICE:- Gunnels Wood Road, Stevenage, Hertfordshire, SG1 2AS, England ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release?
Yeah! Cheap shots at Symantec are reserved for those of us who have spent many restless nights fighting Netbackup. =P Just my .02 - Migrated several Windows 2000 5.1 environments to 6.0 MP4 and then to 6.5.1, 6.5.2 and 6.5.2a. Although there have been issues, I've only had to apply one engineering binary to one environment that had an issue with calendar backups. Maybe I'm just lucky (or maybe Symantec doesn't test on Non-Windows OS =P) but from my experience I think 5.1, 6.0 MP4, 6.51+ are all stable products. -Jonathan From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Ed Wilts Sent: Thu 8/21/2008 7:46 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release? On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 6:04 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Watch out for this one with 6.5.1 on Windows: http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/301175.htm The technote says that this is fixed in 6.5.2. <http://6.5.2./> Right now I'm caught between that one and the completely broken 6.5.2A - http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/305609.htm The technote says that there's an EEB available for this. 6.5.2A is *NOT completely broken. Many years, us included, are running it in full production. You'd think they'd test this stuff before release by ,say, trying to run a backup or something... This has been discussed before. Your comment is unwarranted and low shots like this don't encourage Symantec employees or other users to help you. .../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] Most recent stable release?
You probably want your Windows media server at 6.5.2A, if you want it at
6.5 anything. (You are, of course, allowed to just leave it at 5.1, but
6.5.2 is where you start getting features supporting Exchange 2007, like
backing up from an inactive node of a cluster. 6.5.3 will provide
individual mailbox item restore from a database backup, rather than
having to do the additional brick level backup to get that.) In theory
that means that you should move your Linux master and media servers to
at least 6.5.2A as well, but that higher version rule is less explicit,
given what was changed in this particular A release. (If you can take
the downtime, go ahead and pull everything up.)
I've personally had no problems with 6.5.2 or 6.5.2A on HP-UX 11iv2
masters, and I believe that the problems related to its misbehavior on a
master server (except for that "first cumulative after upgrade is
actually a full; whoops" thing) that have been reported here pertain
only to Solaris and Windows. I can't speak from experience to Linux
master/media servers.
--
gabriel rosenkoetter
Radian Group Inc, Unix/Linux/VMware Sysadmin / Backup & Recovery
[EMAIL PROTECTED], 215 231 1556
_
From: Dean [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2008 9:44 AM
To: List Veritas List
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release?
I have some interest in this topic. We are running a fairly simple,
fresh, 6.5.2 install with one RHEL4 Master and one RHEL4 Media server.
Things are going relatively smoothly.
But we are looking at moving our first Windows Media Server over from
the old 5.1 world to the new 6.5.2 environment. This Media Sever looks
after backups for an Exchange cluster and Enterprise Vault for Exchange.
6.5.2 is pretty stable for us in a Linux only environment.
But what do others think about introducing a W2K3 Media Server into the
mix? 6.5.2? 6.5.1?
Any thoughts appreciated. Keep in mind this will only be a Media Server.
The Master is still Linux and so far has been pretty stable (apart from
a few problems that can't really be blamed on Netbackup itself).
Thanks,
Dean
On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 10:41 PM, Mark Glazerman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
We're running 6.5.1 on a Solaris x86 master and apart from a ZFS
issue (which was fixed with engineering binaries) we don't have any
ongoing problems. 6.5.2 and 6.5.2a seem to be releases that fixe lots
of issues for some and create additional problems for others.
Mark J
Mark Glazerman
Desk: 314-889-8282
Cell: 618-520-3401
P please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ed Wilts
Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2008 6:46 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release?
On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 6:04 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Watch out for this one with 6.5.1 on Windows:
http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/301175.htm
The technote says that this is fixed in 6.5.2.
Right now I'm caught between that one and the completely
broken 6.5.2A -
http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/305609.htm
The technote says that there's an EEB available for this.
6.5.2A is *NOT completely broken. Many years, us included, are running
it in full production.
You'd think they'd test this stuff before release by
,say, trying to run a
backup or something...
This has been discussed before. Your comment is unwarranted and
low shots like this don't encourage Symantec employees or other users to
help you.
.../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] Most recent stable release?
2 weeks ago we moved over from 5.1 on HP-UX to 6.5.2a on a clustered Windows 2003 R2 32-bit server, 30 Media Servers all migrated as well (in one go) with a mix of Windows, Solaris and HP-UX Media Servers). To be honest I have to say that all went well (catalog migration included) wihout any major issues. First step was to move 5.1 from HP-UX to the Win cluster and I have to say the admin console was somewhat slow afterwards. However once we moved to 6.5.2a the admin console was lighting fast (Windows cluster has 2 Xeon Quad cores with 16GB memory / each node). Last step (next week) is to upgrade to Windows 2003 64-bit. We did not had to install any engineering patch so from my point of view I must say that this version is stable. Bart Wallebroek SWIFT Message: 2 Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 13:11:21 -0400 From: "Rice, Robert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release? To: "veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu" Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Hi all, Just wondering what the consensus is on the most recent stable release of NBU for Solaris 10 using LTO4? Thanks in advance, Bob ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release?
6.5.1 running here on Solaris10 w LTO4 and no issues. We have some 6.0 upgrades coming up over the next few weeks and will be going to 6.5.1 and avoiding 6.5.2. FWIW, 6.5.3 is delayed till at least October for FA and November for GA. 6.5.3 is supposed to be mostly a bugfix (odd number) release with only minor new features (granular Exchange mailbox recovery) so I'm assuming they are having problems getting all the 6.5.2 bugs completely straightened out. Geoff Stafford Barclaycard US Data Protection Engineering office: 302.255.8302 mobile: 302.377.3060 Barclays www.barclaycardus.com This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may contain confidential and/or proprietary information. It is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity who is the intended recipient. Unauthorized use of this information is prohibited. If you have received this in error, please contact the sender by replying to this message and delete this material from any system it may be on. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release?
Do I have to run the nbcc utility again like I did when I upgraded from 5.x? Is Symantec involved in the upgrade this time? From: Ed Wilts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2008 9:49 AM To: Randy Samora Cc: Mark Glazerman; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release? On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 9:25 AM, Randy Samora <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I'm running 6.0 MP5 in a Windows environment and it has been running great. I'm about to go to 6.5.1 and from what I've read, that's a pretty stable ledge to sit on for a little while. However, as I mentioned in another post, the server team wants me to support 2008 Server which isn't supported until 6.5.2. From what I'm reading now, it sounds like I would be safer to downgrade the 2008 Server back to 2003 Server until some issues get resolved witih 6.5.2? 6.5.2A is relatively stable if you apply the relevant EEBs. It's probably less work to upgrade your backup environment to 6.5.2 than it is to rebuild that Windows 2008 server as 2003 (although you will teach the admin a needed lesson :-)). YMMV since everybody's NBU environment is different. .../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] Most recent stable release?
On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 9:25 AM, Randy Samora <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > I'm running 6.0 MP5 in a Windows environment and it has been running > great. I'm about to go to 6.5.1 and from what I've read, that's a pretty > stable ledge to sit on for a little while. However, as I mentioned in > another post, the server team wants me to support 2008 Server which isn't > supported until 6.5.2. From what I'm reading now, it sounds like I would > be safer to downgrade the 2008 Server back to 2003 Server until some issues > get resolved witih 6.5.2? > 6.5.2A is relatively stable if you apply the relevant EEBs. It's probably less work to upgrade your backup environment to 6.5.2 than it is to rebuild that Windows 2008 server as 2003 (although you will teach the admin a needed lesson :-)). YMMV since everybody's NBU environment is different. .../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] Most recent stable release?
On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 8:43 AM, Dean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have some interest in this topic. We are running a fairly simple, fresh, > 6.5.2 install with one RHEL4 Master and one RHEL4 Media server. Things are > going relatively smoothly. > > But we are looking at moving our first Windows Media Server over from the > old 5.1 world to the new 6.5.2 environment. This Media Sever looks after > backups for an Exchange cluster and Enterprise Vault for Exchange. > > 6.5.2 is pretty stable for us in a Linux only environment. > > But what do others think about introducing a W2K3 Media Server into the > mix? 6.5.2? 6.5.1? > Ideally the media server should be at the same release as the master. I wouldn't hesitate to put 6.5.2 on that W2K3 media server. Our master is Solaris and we've got a bunch of Windows media servers including one in an SSO environment with Solaris media servers. .../Ed ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release?
I'm running 6.0 MP5 in a Windows environment and it has been running great. I'm about to go to 6.5.1 and from what I've read, that's a pretty stable ledge to sit on for a little while. However, as I mentioned in another post, the server team wants me to support 2008 Server which isn't supported until 6.5.2. From what I'm reading now, it sounds like I would be safer to downgrade the 2008 Server back to 2003 Server until some issues get resolved witih 6.5.2? Thoughts? From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Glazerman Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2008 7:42 AM To: Ed Wilts; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release? We're running 6.5.1 on a Solaris x86 master and apart from a ZFS issue (which was fixed with engineering binaries) we don't have any ongoing problems. 6.5.2 and 6.5.2a seem to be releases that fixe lots of issues for some and create additional problems for others. Mark J Mark Glazerman Desk: 314-889-8282 Cell: 618-520-3401 P please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ed Wilts Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2008 6:46 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release? On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 6:04 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Watch out for this one with 6.5.1 on Windows: http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/301175.htm The technote says that this is fixed in 6.5.2. Right now I'm caught between that one and the completely broken 6.5.2A - http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/305609.htm The technote says that there's an EEB available for this. 6.5.2A is *NOT completely broken. Many years, us included, are running it in full production. You'd think they'd test this stuff before release by ,say, trying to run a backup or something... This has been discussed before. Your comment is unwarranted and low shots like this don't encourage Symantec employees or other users to help you. .../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] Most recent stable release?
I have some interest in this topic. We are running a fairly simple, fresh, 6.5.2 install with one RHEL4 Master and one RHEL4 Media server. Things are going relatively smoothly. But we are looking at moving our first Windows Media Server over from the old 5.1 world to the new 6.5.2 environment. This Media Sever looks after backups for an Exchange cluster and Enterprise Vault for Exchange. 6.5.2 is pretty stable for us in a Linux only environment. But what do others think about introducing a W2K3 Media Server into the mix? 6.5.2? 6.5.1? Any thoughts appreciated. Keep in mind this will only be a Media Server. The Master is still Linux and so far has been pretty stable (apart from a few problems that can't really be blamed on Netbackup itself). Thanks, Dean On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 10:41 PM, Mark Glazerman < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > We're running 6.5.1 on a Solaris x86 master and apart from a ZFS issue > (which was fixed with engineering binaries) we don't have any ongoing > problems. 6.5.2 and 6.5.2a seem to be releases that fixe lots of issues > for some and create additional problems for others. > > > > Mark J > > > > *Mark Glazerman* > > Desk: 314-889-8282 > > Cell: 618-520-3401 > > P please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to > > > > *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Ed Wilts > *Sent:* Thursday, August 21, 2008 6:46 AM > *To:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] > *Cc:* veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu > *Subject:* Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release? > > > > On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 6:04 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Watch out for this one with 6.5.1 on Windows: > > http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/301175.htm > > > The technote says that this is fixed in 6.5.2. > > > > Right now I'm caught between that one and the completely broken 6.5.2A - > http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/305609.htm > > > The technote says that there's an EEB available for this. 6.5.2A is *NOT > completely broken. Many years, us included, are running it in full > production. > > > > You'd think they'd test this stuff before release by ,say, trying to run a > backup or something... > > > This has been discussed before. Your comment is unwarranted and low shots > like this don't encourage Symantec employees or other users to help you. > > .../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] Most recent stable release?
We're running 6.5.1 on a Solaris x86 master and apart from a ZFS issue (which was fixed with engineering binaries) we don't have any ongoing problems. 6.5.2 and 6.5.2a seem to be releases that fixe lots of issues for some and create additional problems for others. Mark J Mark Glazerman Desk: 314-889-8282 Cell: 618-520-3401 P please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ed Wilts Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2008 6:46 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release? On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 6:04 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Watch out for this one with 6.5.1 on Windows: http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/301175.htm The technote says that this is fixed in 6.5.2. Right now I'm caught between that one and the completely broken 6.5.2A - http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/305609.htm The technote says that there's an EEB available for this. 6.5.2A is *NOT completely broken. Many years, us included, are running it in full production. You'd think they'd test this stuff before release by ,say, trying to run a backup or something... This has been discussed before. Your comment is unwarranted and low shots like this don't encourage Symantec employees or other users to help you. .../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] Most recent stable release?
On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 6:04 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Watch out for this one with 6.5.1 on Windows: > > http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/301175.htm The technote says that this is fixed in 6.5.2. > Right now I'm caught between that one and the completely broken 6.5.2A - > http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/305609.htm The technote says that there's an EEB available for this. 6.5.2A is *NOT completely broken. Many years, us included, are running it in full production. > You'd think they'd test this stuff before release by ,say, trying to run a > backup or something... This has been discussed before. Your comment is unwarranted and low shots like this don't encourage Symantec employees or other users to help you. .../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] Most recent stable release?
Watch out for this one with 6.5.1 on Windows: http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/301175.htm Right now I'm caught between that one and the completely broken 6.5.2A - http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/305609.htm You'd think they'd test this stuff before release by ,say, trying to run a backup or something... - Bluejay Adametz I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use. - Galileo Galilei, astronomer & physicist (1564-1642) "Jeff Lightner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 08/20/2008 16:50 To <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, cc Subject Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release? We’ve been using 6.5.1 on HP-UX and other than the error messages for vaulting it seems relatively stable. We’ve NOT upgraded to 6.5.2 or 6.5.2a mainly due to all the issues reported on this list. From:[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2008 3:35 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release? I'll offer up: Not 6.5.1, 6.5.2 or v6.5.2A as a limited answer. I've been fighting bugs for 3 weeks on this version (6.5.2A) and their emergency nbpem patch for it fixes a known 9 bugs and there's at least one more (since the latest version doesn't fix my problem either). I upgraded from 6.5.1 since it had a bug, too, on resource allocation. This is on a Sol 8 master server, however. -M From:[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rice, Robert Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2008 11:11 AM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release? Hi all, Just wondering what the consensus is on the most recent stable release of NBU for Solaris 10 using LTO4? Thanks in advance, Bob -- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail may contain privileged or confidential information and is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the contents of this information is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please reply immediately to the sender that you have received the message in error, and delete it. Thank you. -- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release?
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 12:11 PM, Rice, Robert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Just wondering what the consensus is on the most recent stable release of > NBU for Solaris 10 using LTO4? > 6.5.1 with a couple of Engineering binaries is a good stable environment today. We were there for over 6 months and it was fairly solid. There are some features that are in 6.5.2 - if you need them, you don't have much choice. Be aware that you may need some engineering binaries for 6.5.2 as well. .../Ed -- Ed Wilts, Mounds View, MN, USA [EMAIL PROTECTED] If I've helped you, please make a donation to my favorite charity at http://firstgiving.com/edwilts ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release?
Ditto for us here at the Mountain. Steve Hudson Enterprise Storage Iron Mountain 745 Atlantic Ave Boston, MA 02111 Phone: (617) 535-2849 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit the new www.ironmountain.com Tour Iron Mountain From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Lightner Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2008 4:39 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release? We've been using 6.5.1 on HP-UX and other than the error messages for vaulting it seems relatively stable. We've NOT upgraded to 6.5.2 or 6.5.2a mainly due to all the issues reported on this list. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2008 3:35 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release? I'll offer up: Not 6.5.1, 6.5.2 or v6.5.2A as a limited answer. I've been fighting bugs for 3 weeks on this version (6.5.2A) and their emergency nbpem patch for it fixes a known 9 bugs and there's at least one more (since the latest version doesn't fix my problem either). I upgraded from 6.5.1 since it had a bug, too, on resource allocation. This is on a Sol 8 master server, however. -M From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rice, Robert Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2008 11:11 AM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release? Hi all, Just wondering what the consensus is on the most recent stable release of NBU for Solaris 10 using LTO4? Thanks in advance, Bob -- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail may contain privileged or confidential information and is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the contents of this information is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please reply immediately to the sender that you have received the message in error, and delete it. Thank you. -- The information contained in this email message and its attachments is intended only for the private and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above, unless the sender expressly agrees otherwise. Transmission of email over the Internet is not a secure communications medium. If you are requesting or have requested the transmittal of personal data, as defined in applicable privacy laws by means of email or in an attachment to email you must select a more secure alternate means of transmittal that supports your obligations to protect such personal data. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient and/or you have received this email in error, you must take no action based on the information in this email and you are hereby notified that any dissemination, misuse, copying, or disclosure of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by email and delete the original message.___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release?
6.0MP6 here, LTO-2, LTO-3, LTO-4, Catalog Compression/in some environments, in-line tape copy.. No major issues.. On Wed, 20 Aug 2008, Rice, Robert wrote: > Hi all, > > Just wondering what the consensus is on the most recent stable release of NBU > for Solaris 10 using LTO4? > > Thanks in advance, > Bob > ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release?
We've been using 6.5.1 on HP-UX and other than the error messages for vaulting it seems relatively stable. We've NOT upgraded to 6.5.2 or 6.5.2a mainly due to all the issues reported on this list. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2008 3:35 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release? I'll offer up: Not 6.5.1, 6.5.2 or v6.5.2A as a limited answer. I've been fighting bugs for 3 weeks on this version (6.5.2A) and their emergency nbpem patch for it fixes a known 9 bugs and there's at least one more (since the latest version doesn't fix my problem either). I upgraded from 6.5.1 since it had a bug, too, on resource allocation. This is on a Sol 8 master server, however. -M From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rice, Robert Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2008 11:11 AM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release? Hi all, Just wondering what the consensus is on the most recent stable release of NBU for Solaris 10 using LTO4? Thanks in advance, Bob -- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail may contain privileged or confidential information and is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the contents of this information is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please reply immediately to the sender that you have received the message in error, and delete it. Thank you. -- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release?
I'll offer up: Not 6.5.1, 6.5.2 or v6.5.2A as a limited answer. I've been fighting bugs for 3 weeks on this version (6.5.2A) and their emergency nbpem patch for it fixes a known 9 bugs and there's at least one more (since the latest version doesn't fix my problem either). I upgraded from 6.5.1 since it had a bug, too, on resource allocation. This is on a Sol 8 master server, however. -M From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rice, Robert Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2008 11:11 AM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release? Hi all, Just wondering what the consensus is on the most recent stable release of NBU for Solaris 10 using LTO4? Thanks in advance, Bob ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release?
Hi all, Just wondering what the consensus is on the most recent stable release of NBU for Solaris 10 using LTO4? Thanks in advance, Bob ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
