[Veritas-bu] Multiple retention in one pool
Dear all I have volume pool test_pool, then I have 2 backup policies for 1 client they are policy_test_A and policy_test_B. those backup policies take tapes from test_pool. But policy_test_A have retention 1 week and policy_test_B have retention 1 month so in same volume pool I have 2 different retention. From that case above what is different if I set multiple retention and if I don't set multiple retention ? and what is the effect in future ? Please give me advise, Thanx Chodhetz __ Yahoo! Movies - Search movie info and celeb profiles and photos. http://sg.movies.yahoo.com/ ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiple retention in one pool
There is an option (off by default) in which one tape can use multiple retentions, but I would not recommend it. If you have a 20MB file that is infinite retention and the rest of an LTO2/3 tape as 1 month retention, it will become confusing, yes? Keep different retentions with separate volume pools. On Mon, 26 Feb 2007, chodhetz wrote: Dear all I have volume pool test_pool, then I have 2 backup policies for 1 client they are policy_test_A and policy_test_B. those backup policies take tapes from test_pool. But policy_test_A have retention 1 week and policy_test_B have retention 1 month so in same volume pool I have 2 different retention. From that case above what is different if I set multiple retention and if I don't set multiple retention ? and what is the effect in future ? Please give me advise, Thanx Chodhetz __ Yahoo! Movies - Search movie info and celeb profiles and photos. http://sg.movies.yahoo.com/ ___ 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] Multiple retention in one pool and error 96
Dear Justin Piszcz Thanx for your attention My next question that ... 1. is it possible error status 84 96 because of multiple retention in one volume pool ?. ... I backup my database with retention 1 month and archive log with retention 1 week in same volume pool ? ... I always found those problem for these backup policies with same pool but different retention. 2. now I always got problem with error 96. but I still don't find any solution. Is it possible error 96 too, if I set LTO3 (hcart3) drive to LTO2(hcart2) drive ? ... 3. what makes error 96 got happen ? I have follow instruction from netbackup support document but I still found error 96. Thanx a lot for helping me. Chodhetz -Original Message- From: Justin Piszcz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 Februari 2007 16:52 To: chodhetz Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiple retention in one pool There is an option (off by default) in which one tape can use multiple retentions, but I would not recommend it. If you have a 20MB file that is infinite retention and the rest of an LTO2/3 tape as 1 month retention, it will become confusing, yes? Keep different retentions with separate volume pools. On Mon, 26 Feb 2007, chodhetz wrote: Dear all I have volume pool test_pool, then I have 2 backup policies for 1 client they are policy_test_A and policy_test_B. those backup policies take tapes from test_pool. But policy_test_A have retention 1 week and policy_test_B have retention 1 month so in same volume pool I have 2 different retention. From that case above what is different if I set multiple retention and if I don't set multiple retention ? and what is the effect in future ? Please give me advise, Thanx Chodhetz __ Yahoo! Movies - Search movie info and celeb profiles and photos. http://sg.movies.yahoo.com/ ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu Yahoo! Singapore Answers Real people. Real questions. Real answers. Share what you know at http://answers.yahoo.com.sg ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiple retention in one pool and error 96
1. Sounds like you have mis-matched tape/storage units. Either use all LTO2 or all LTO3 for everything, otherwise you need to make sure your storage units and groups only correspond to the media they back up to. LTO2-LTO2 LTO3-LTO3 for example. 2. Read the NetBackup manual for System Administration and Media Administration, it will answer these questions. 3. See number 2. On Mon, 26 Feb 2007, chodhetz wrote: Dear Justin Piszcz Thanx for your attention My next question that ... 1. is it possible error status 84 96 because of multiple retention in one volume pool ?. ... I backup my database with retention 1 month and archive log with retention 1 week in same volume pool ? ... I always found those problem for these backup policies with same pool but different retention. 2. now I always got problem with error 96. but I still don't find any solution. Is it possible error 96 too, if I set LTO3 (hcart3) drive to LTO2(hcart2) drive ? ... 3. what makes error 96 got happen ? I have follow instruction from netbackup support document but I still found error 96. Thanx a lot for helping me. Chodhetz -Original Message- From: Justin Piszcz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 Februari 2007 16:52 To: chodhetz Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiple retention in one pool There is an option (off by default) in which one tape can use multiple retentions, but I would not recommend it. If you have a 20MB file that is infinite retention and the rest of an LTO2/3 tape as 1 month retention, it will become confusing, yes? Keep different retentions with separate volume pools. On Mon, 26 Feb 2007, chodhetz wrote: Dear all I have volume pool test_pool, then I have 2 backup policies for 1 client they are policy_test_A and policy_test_B. those backup policies take tapes from test_pool. But policy_test_A have retention 1 week and policy_test_B have retention 1 month so in same volume pool I have 2 different retention. From that case above what is different if I set multiple retention and if I don't set multiple retention ? and what is the effect in future ? Please give me advise, Thanx Chodhetz __ Yahoo! Movies - Search movie info and celeb profiles and photos. http://sg.movies.yahoo.com/ ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu Yahoo! Singapore Answers Real people. Real questions. Real answers. Share what you know at http://answers.yahoo.com.sg ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiple retention in one pool
On 2/26/2007 3:32 AM, chodhetz wrote: I have volume pool test_pool, then I have 2 backup policies for 1 client they are policy_test_A and policy_test_B. those backup policies take tapes from test_pool. But policy_test_A have retention 1 week and policy_test_B have retention 1 month so in same volume pool I have 2 different retention. There are no issues having multiple retentions in the same pool. However, I don't recommend having 2 different policies for the same client with different retentions - each policy is independent and it's quite possible, if you're not careful, to have the weekly and monthly run on the same day. From that case above what is different if I set multiple retention and if I don't set multiple retention ? and what is the effect in future ? Don't allow multiple retentions on the same tape if you can avoid it. You may end up running out of tapes because you won't be able to re-use the tape until the oldest image expires. .../Ed -- Ed Wilts, Mounds View, MN, USA mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiple retention in one pool
Whoa there tiger. Keeping different retentions on different volume polls is NOT the way to go IMO. If you have 20 GB of data that must be kept offsite for infinity you are already losing 1 tape forever, why not put more data on it? Sure, you could keep that tape in the bot and keep writing to it, but most shops I know have to remove tapes weekly. So why not put more than 20GB of data on that tape? I have to keep email backups (two tapes or so) for 5 years. That's two tapes I'm losing for 5 years, why not take the 80% free space on tape #2 and put some 1 year retention data on it? Further, extra volume pools is definitely a tape loser, not saver. Media servers cannot share volumes in a pool. So using more volume pools than you need actually reduces your efficiency. Example: 3 Media Servers Writing to Three Volume Pools = Minimum of 9 tapes if each server writes to each pool. (3 servers x 3 volume pools.) 3 Media Servers Writing to 1 Volume Pool (Single Retention Per Media) = 3 (servers) x 1 Volume Pool x number of retentions 3 Media Servers writing to 1 Volume Pool (mixed retentions) = 3 media (minimum.) I know this doesn't work for everyone, and when ver 6.5 comes out the 3 media servers will be able to share media which is a nice touch. All I'm saying is that if you aren't offsiting 100+ media a week there's much tape love to be gained by looking into tape efficiency and cramming as much data onto media as possible. -Jonathan PS: Allow multiple retentions per media has to be turned on *per* media server. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Justin Piszcz Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 4:52 AM To: chodhetz Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiple retention in one pool There is an option (off by default) in which one tape can use multiple retentions, but I would not recommend it. If you have a 20MB file that is infinite retention and the rest of an LTO2/3 tape as 1 month retention, it will become confusing, yes? Keep different retentions with separate volume pools. On Mon, 26 Feb 2007, chodhetz wrote: Dear all I have volume pool test_pool, then I have 2 backup policies for 1 client they are policy_test_A and policy_test_B. those backup policies take tapes from test_pool. But policy_test_A have retention 1 week and policy_test_B have retention 1 month so in same volume pool I have 2 different retention. From that case above what is different if I set multiple retention and if I don't set multiple retention ? and what is the effect in future ? Please give me advise, Thanx Chodhetz __ Yahoo! Movies - Search movie info and celeb profiles and photos. http://sg.movies.yahoo.com/ ___ 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] Multiple retention in one pool
You do realize that the opposite is true, in that by allowing mixed retentions in this way, you are also allowing as little as a few block of 5 year retention data to be written to the end of a 400Gig tape full of 2-3 week retention data. So that Tape which could go back to scratch after 2 weeks is being locked up by few blocks of data for 5 years. Paul -- -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin, Jonathan (Contractor) Sent: February 26, 2007 1:28 PM To: Justin Piszcz; chodhetz Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiple retention in one pool I have to keep email backups (two tapes or so) for 5 years. That's two tapes I'm losing for 5 years, why not take the 80% free space on tape #2 and put some 1 year retention data on it? La version française suit le texte anglais. This email may contain privileged and/or confidential information, and the Bank of Canada does not waive any related rights. Any distribution, use, or copying of this email or the information it contains by other than the intended recipient is unauthorized. If you received this email in error please delete it immediately from your system and notify the sender promptly by email that you have done so. Le présent courriel peut contenir de l'information privilégiée ou confidentielle. La Banque du Canada ne renonce pas aux droits qui s'y rapportent. Toute diffusion, utilisation ou copie de ce courriel ou des renseignements qu'il contient par une personne autre que le ou les destinataires désignés est interdite. Si vous recevez ce courriel par erreur, veuillez le supprimer immédiatement et envoyer sans délai à l'expéditeur un message électronique pour l'aviser que vous avez éliminé de votre ordinateur toute copie du courriel reçu. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiple retention in one pool
Granted, you are correct and the opposite could also be true. My 5 year backup could start on the last part of tape number one, fill tape number 2 and part of number 3. That would be terribly inefficient given that yes, I'm now offsiting three tapes instead of two. That has to be managed, and I do manage it. Disk staging helps with this, job scheduling helps as well. Really what we need to have is a high level analyzer of what data gets written to what medium when. I don't see that happening anytime soon although some of the 3rd party tools are getting there. Long story short, I was able with proper planning to go from media efficiency somewhere in the 60% range to 90% which is a huge savings in tape costs. Depending entirely on configuration, Multiple Retentions per media could be a very good or a very bad thing and recommendations for or against using it need to be qualified as such. IMO multiple volume pools is a MUCH LESS efficient thing to do than Multiple Retentions Per Media although as I mentioned 6.5 is going to help that greatly! -Jonathan -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Keating Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 1:42 PM To: Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiple retention in one pool You do realize that the opposite is true, in that by allowing mixed retentions in this way, you are also allowing as little as a few block of 5 year retention data to be written to the end of a 400Gig tape full of 2-3 week retention data. So that Tape which could go back to scratch after 2 weeks is being locked up by few blocks of data for 5 years. Paul -- -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin, Jonathan (Contractor) Sent: February 26, 2007 1:28 PM To: Justin Piszcz; chodhetz Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiple retention in one pool I have to keep email backups (two tapes or so) for 5 years. That's two tapes I'm losing for 5 years, why not take the 80% free space on tape #2 and put some 1 year retention data on it? La version française suit le texte anglais. This email may contain privileged and/or confidential information, and the Bank of Canada does not waive any related rights. Any distribution, use, or copying of this email or the information it contains by other than the intended recipient is unauthorized. If you received this email in error please delete it immediately from your system and notify the sender promptly by email that you have done so. Le présent courriel peut contenir de l'information privilégiée ou confidentielle. La Banque du Canada ne renonce pas aux droits qui s'y rapportent. Toute diffusion, utilisation ou copie de ce courriel ou des renseignements qu'il contient par une personne autre que le ou les destinataires désignés est interdite. Si vous recevez ce courriel par erreur, veuillez le supprimer immédiatement et envoyer sans délai à l'expéditeur un message électronique pour l'aviser que vous avez éliminé de votre ordinateur toute copie du courriel reçu. ___ 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] Multiple retention in one pool
Multiple retentions per volume is a global parameter in 5.1 that is only on the master. It would be nice if it were a media server option, but in 5.1 it is global. If it were a media server option, then both sides of the aisle would be happy. Bobby Williams 2205 Peterson Drive Chattanooga, Tennessee 37421 423-296-8200 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin, Jonathan (Contractor) Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 1:28 PM To: Justin Piszcz; chodhetz Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiple retention in one pool Whoa there tiger. Keeping different retentions on different volume polls is NOT the way to go IMO. If you have 20 GB of data that must be kept offsite for infinity you are already losing 1 tape forever, why not put more data on it? Sure, you could keep that tape in the bot and keep writing to it, but most shops I know have to remove tapes weekly. So why not put more than 20GB of data on that tape? I have to keep email backups (two tapes or so) for 5 years. That's two tapes I'm losing for 5 years, why not take the 80% free space on tape #2 and put some 1 year retention data on it? Further, extra volume pools is definitely a tape loser, not saver. Media servers cannot share volumes in a pool. So using more volume pools than you need actually reduces your efficiency. Example: 3 Media Servers Writing to Three Volume Pools = Minimum of 9 tapes if each server writes to each pool. (3 servers x 3 volume pools.) 3 Media Servers Writing to 1 Volume Pool (Single Retention Per Media) = 3 (servers) x 1 Volume Pool x number of retentions 3 Media Servers writing to 1 Volume Pool (mixed retentions) = 3 media (minimum.) I know this doesn't work for everyone, and when ver 6.5 comes out the 3 media servers will be able to share media which is a nice touch. All I'm saying is that if you aren't offsiting 100+ media a week there's much tape love to be gained by looking into tape efficiency and cramming as much data onto media as possible. -Jonathan PS: Allow multiple retentions per media has to be turned on *per* media server. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Justin Piszcz Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 4:52 AM To: chodhetz Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiple retention in one pool There is an option (off by default) in which one tape can use multiple retentions, but I would not recommend it. If you have a 20MB file that is infinite retention and the rest of an LTO2/3 tape as 1 month retention, it will become confusing, yes? Keep different retentions with separate volume pools. On Mon, 26 Feb 2007, chodhetz wrote: Dear all I have volume pool test_pool, then I have 2 backup policies for 1 client they are policy_test_A and policy_test_B. those backup policies take tapes from test_pool. But policy_test_A have retention 1 week and policy_test_B have retention 1 month so in same volume pool I have 2 different retention. From that case above what is different if I set multiple retention and if I don't set multiple retention ? and what is the effect in future ? Please give me advise, Thanx Chodhetz __ Yahoo! Movies - Search movie info and celeb profiles and photos. http://sg.movies.yahoo.com/ ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
