[Veritas-bu] Multiplexing on destaging basic disk dssu
Hello All, Is there a way to do the above? If so how? The tape storage unit is already set to allow multiplexing, but the destaging is only using one job per tape drive at a time. NBU 7.0 Thank you in advance for any advice, Patrick Whelan VERITAS Certified NetBackup Support Engineer for UNIX. VERITAS Certified NetBackup Support Engineer for Windows. mailto:netbac...@whelan-consulting.co.uk netbac...@whelan-consulting.co.uk http://www.linkedin.com/in/patrickjosephwhelan Description: cid:image001.gif@01C99E80.E2717A60 image001.gifimage003.jpg___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing on destaging basic disk dssu
No, there is no way to achieve this. You can only use more drives to speed up the process stefanos. From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu [mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Patrick Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2011 1:41 PM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing on destaging basic disk dssu Hello All, Is there a way to do the above? If so how? The tape storage unit is already set to allow multiplexing, but the destaging is only using one job per tape drive at a time. NBU 7.0 Thank you in advance for any advice, Patrick Whelan VERITAS Certified NetBackup Support Engineer for UNIX. VERITAS Certified NetBackup Support Engineer for Windows. mailto:netbac...@whelan-consulting.co.uk netbac...@whelan-consulting.co.uk http://www.linkedin.com/in/patrickjosephwhelan Description: cid:image001.gif@01C99E80.E2717A60 image002.gifimage003.jpg___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing on destaging basic disk dssu
Believe it or not I am actually looking into this! There are some technotes on the behaviour of this, because I am a little hacked off a DSSU is using 6 tapes for each job!!! http://www.symantec.com/business/support/index?page=contentid=TECH44719 This is just one of them Simon From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu [mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of rusty.ma...@sungard.com Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2011 5:31 PM To: Patrick Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing on destaging basic disk dssu I believe you can't MPX duplications because of a limitation within the bpduplicate process. It will allow you to keep already MPX'ed images MPX'ed, but you can't MPX a duplication job that isn't MPX'ed already, which is your case since they are on disk. The jobs coming off your disk should be fast enough to keep this from happening. If it's not fast enough, you'll need to look to tuning your components. Rusty Major, MCSE, BCFP, VCS ▪ Sr. Storage Engineer ▪ SunGard Availability Services ▪ 757 N. Eldridge Suite 200, Houston TX 77079 ▪ 281-584-4693 Keeping People and Information Connected® ▪ http://availability.sungard.com/ http://availability.sungard.com/ P Think before you print CONFIDENTIALITY: This e-mail (including any attachments) may contain confidential, proprietary and privileged information, and unauthorized disclosure or use is prohibited. If you received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender and delete this e-mail from your system. Patrick netbac...@whelan-consulting.co.uk Sent by: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu 03/01/2011 07:06 AM To veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu cc Subject [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing on destaging basic disk dssu Hello All, Is there a way to do the above? If so how? The tape storage unit is already set to allow multiplexing, but the destaging is only using one job per tape drive at a time. NBU 7.0 Thank you in advance for any advice, Patrick Whelan VERITAS Certified NetBackup Support Engineer for UNIX. VERITAS Certified NetBackup Support Engineer for Windows. netbac...@whelan-consulting.co.uk mailto:netbac...@whelan-consulting.co.uk http://www.linkedin.com/in/patrickjosephwhelan ___ 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 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. -o- Astrium Limited, Registered in England and Wales No. 2449259 Registered Office: Gunnels Wood Road, Stevenage, Hertfordshire, SG1 2AS, EnglandATT468691.gifATT468692.jpg___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing on destaging basic disk dssu
Another one... http://www.symantec.com/business/support/index?page=contentid=TECH44996 Simon From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu [mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of rusty.ma...@sungard.com Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2011 5:31 PM To: Patrick Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing on destaging basic disk dssu I believe you can't MPX duplications because of a limitation within the bpduplicate process. It will allow you to keep already MPX'ed images MPX'ed, but you can't MPX a duplication job that isn't MPX'ed already, which is your case since they are on disk. The jobs coming off your disk should be fast enough to keep this from happening. If it's not fast enough, you'll need to look to tuning your components. Rusty Major, MCSE, BCFP, VCS ▪ Sr. Storage Engineer ▪ SunGard Availability Services ▪ 757 N. Eldridge Suite 200, Houston TX 77079 ▪ 281-584-4693 Keeping People and Information Connected® ▪ http://availability.sungard.com/ http://availability.sungard.com/ P Think before you print CONFIDENTIALITY: This e-mail (including any attachments) may contain confidential, proprietary and privileged information, and unauthorized disclosure or use is prohibited. If you received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender and delete this e-mail from your system. Patrick netbac...@whelan-consulting.co.uk Sent by: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu 03/01/2011 07:06 AM To veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu cc Subject [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing on destaging basic disk dssu Hello All, Is there a way to do the above? If so how? The tape storage unit is already set to allow multiplexing, but the destaging is only using one job per tape drive at a time. NBU 7.0 Thank you in advance for any advice, Patrick Whelan VERITAS Certified NetBackup Support Engineer for UNIX. VERITAS Certified NetBackup Support Engineer for Windows. netbac...@whelan-consulting.co.uk mailto:netbac...@whelan-consulting.co.uk http://www.linkedin.com/in/patrickjosephwhelan ___ 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 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. -o- Astrium Limited, Registered in England and Wales No. 2449259 Registered Office: Gunnels Wood Road, Stevenage, Hertfordshire, SG1 2AS, EnglandATT468691.gifATT468692.jpg___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing on destaging basic disk dssu
On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 5:41 AM, Patrick netbac...@whelan-consulting.co.ukwrote: Is there a way to do the above? If so how? Short answer: no. Longer answer: It's been requested multiple times and is being considered for a future release. There are ways to configure yourself around these limitations by configuring more storage units and reducing the maximum size of a destage run to force it to kick off more jobs. Then you'll run into issues on saturating your disk subsystem... With an LTO-4 taking up to 400MB/sec of well-compressable data, how many of those streams can your disks take? .../Ed image001.gif___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing on destaging basic disk dssu (FINAL)
Hi All, I guess I will have to live with it. At the moment the destaging kicks off about 40 jobs writing to two LTO5 drives. I was just hoping to make it faster, but maybe it's alright the way it is. Oh, well. Thank all of you for your answers and inspirations. Regards, Patrick Whelan VERITAS Certified NetBackup Support Engineer for UNIX. VERITAS Certified NetBackup Support Engineer for Windows. netbac...@whelan-consulting.co.uk http://www.linkedin.com/in/patrickjosephwhelan Description: cid:image001.gif@01C99E80.E2717A60 From: Ed Wilts [mailto:ewi...@ewilts.org] Sent: 01 March 2011 18:27 To: Patrick Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing on destaging basic disk dssu On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 5:41 AM, Patrick netbac...@whelan-consulting.co.uk wrote: Is there a way to do the above? If so how? Short answer: no. Longer answer: It's been requested multiple times and is being considered for a future release. There are ways to configure yourself around these limitations by configuring more storage units and reducing the maximum size of a destage run to force it to kick off more jobs. Then you'll run into issues on saturating your disk subsystem... With an LTO-4 taking up to 400MB/sec of well-compressable data, how many of those streams can your disks take? .../Ed image004.gifimage001.jpg___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing on VTL's
I agree with b and c, but there a can be a little misleading as we learned the hard way this past year. Netbackup records the start of a fragment and not the location of the file on the tape. So it has to read the whole fragment until it finds the file it is looking for. Sounds as if you had a lng restore experience, Len. As mentioned, I haven't empirically tested whether F-L-B is used in restoring part of a multiplex set (if it's used in individual-file restore, you'd think it would apply to finding the files of one backup in a mux set), but the location of every file on the tape definitely is recorded--the block numbers are field #5 in the output below: # /usr/openv/netbackup/bin/cat_convert -dump *443_INCR.f num len plendlenblknum ii raw_sz GB dev_num path data 0 0 1 50 0 0 0 0 8388728 / 16877 root root 0 1209535204 1209430138 1209430138 1 0 5 49 1 1 0 0 8388731 /usr/ 16877 root sys 0 1209535162 1208501866 1208501866 [...] 18826 107 41 53 2286045 2 0 0 8388731 /usr/openv/netbackup/bin/private/nblogcfg 33088 root bin 54048 1208506181 1195233073 1209450948 18827 80 41 53 2286152 2 0 0 8388731 /usr/openv/netbackup/bin/private/nbloggen 33088 root bin 40024 1208506181 1195233073 1209450948 18828 73 41 53 2286232 2 0 0 8388731 /usr/openv/netbackup/bin/private/nblogmgr 33088 root bin 36564 1208506181 1195233074 1209450948 18829 111 42 53 2286305 2 0 0 8388731 /usr/openv/netbackup/bin/private/nblogview 33133 root bin 56304 1208506181 1195233074 1209450948 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:veritas-bu- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of bob944 Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 9:03 PM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing on VTL's My main concern is that when doing restores off a multiplexed tape, the VTL READ speed off the disk(let's say it's 80MB/s) is the same whether there's MPX in the stream or not. The restore will throw away the bytes that doesn't belong to the client, so out of a 80 MB/s stream coming off the disk, you will throw away (let's say) 60MB and use only 20. It's this reduction in effective restore speed that's my main concern. Perhaps you'll have time to test and share here? I'd expect NetBackup to treat it as multiplexed tape and not read the intervening data. IME, most multiplexed-tape-restore horror stories are no longer valid due to a) fast-locate-block's ability to skip the intervening data (I have never explicitly tested this), b) drives that supply data faster than the client can write it and c) properly designed multiplexed backups can restore multiple clients significantly faster than non-muxed (I have tested b and c). ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing on VTLs
There are some vendors that de-duplicate based on a sliding window out of a stream of data that can be adversely affected by multiplexing also. If you take a fixed block the statement I've gotten from the vendors is that if you mix streams of data using multiplexing the de-dupe ratio can decrease. Say for instance you are backing up 2 large databases and you run a full every day. If you back up the databases as separate streams you will get a great de-dupe ratio. See the below simple diagram, each || is a block.. |||||||||||| 1 (Database 1) |||||||||||| 2 (Database 2) Now, if you take those 2 databases and multiplex them together, like so: |||||||||||| 1221212122112212212121121 My blocks can be different now and I might not get the same de-dupe ratio. Granted, this is a very simple representation of it and I'm sure many people can pole many holes in this, but from the information I've gotten from the de-dupe vendors is that that multi-plexing can change the way the blocks are seen by the de-dupe engine and cause this type of inability to de-dupe. -Trey From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ed Wilts Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 7:09 PM To: Mike Sparkes Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing on VTLs On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 6:36 PM, Mike Sparkes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Multiplexing mixes streams of data from multiple sources into one stream to the storage device. A de-duplication product on that storage device will be breaking up the stream into blocks and looking for duplicate blocks. Let us assume that three backups are being multiplexed and that no data changed since the previous backup. It is unlikely that the data will mix together again at the same rate in the same ratios to create the same blocks and so they will be treated as unique and stored in full. I disagree. Multiplexing doesn't mix up the blocks coming from each server. You may see things like block 1 and 2 from server 1 followed by blocks 1, 2, and 3 from server 2, but if block 2 from server 1 is the same as block 3 from server 2, it will de-dupe. It doesn't matter what the speed is today versus yesterday - you're not de-duping the tape but you're de-duping the blocks. Duplication typically is not done by files - it's done by blocks, and that isn't changing with multiplexing. .../Ed Mike Sparkes From: Ed Wilts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 4:12 PM To: Mike Sparkes Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing on VTLs On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 5:58 PM, Mike Sparkes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: if you ever move to de-duplication, the act of multiplexing your backups ruins the ability to detect duplicate blocks. Your de-dupe ratio will be terrible. I don't follow your logic here. Why would multiplexing affect the de-dupe ratio? -- Ed Wilts, Mounds View, MN, USA RHCE, BCFP, BCSD, SCSP mailto:[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] Multiplexing on VTLs
Mike is right, depending on the vendor. Please note that he works for one of them, so he should know what he's talking about. Dedupe works at the subfile-level, but not at the block level. (Vendors that chunk data up, which isn't all of them, often create chunks that are larger than a block.) Therefore, multiplexing absolutely CAN remove all deduplication capability, depending on the vendor you're using and how the stars line up. With some vendors, it will make your dedupe ratio 1:1. With others, it will not affect it at all. --- W. Curtis Preston Backup Blog @ www.backupcentral.com VP Data Protection, GlassHouse Technologies From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ed Wilts Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 4:12 PM To: Mike Sparkes Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing on VTLs On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 5:58 PM, Mike Sparkes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: if you ever move to de-duplication, the act of multiplexing your backups ruins the ability to detect duplicate blocks. Your de-dupe ratio will be terrible. I don't follow your logic here. Why would multiplexing affect the de-dupe ratio? .../Ed -- Ed Wilts, Mounds View, MN, USA RHCE, BCFP, BCSD, SCSP mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] If I've helped you, please make a donation to my favorite charity at http://firstgiving.com/edwilts This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing on VTL's
FLB is used to get to the first file you are restoring. It is NOT used once you start reading that file. The rest of the restore will read EVERYTHING and throw away the blocks it doesn't need. While this may not affect the performance of a single file, it will absolutely affect the potential performance of a large restore. Multiplexing with VTLs usually hurt less, because usually the resulting slower speed is still faster than what the client can write at. --- W. Curtis Preston Backup Blog @ www.backupcentral.com VP Data Protection, GlassHouse Technologies -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:veritas-bu- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of bob944 Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2008 12:10 AM To: 'Len Boyle'; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing on VTL's I agree with b and c, but there a can be a little misleading as we learned the hard way this past year. Netbackup records the start of a fragment and not the location of the file on the tape. So it has to read the whole fragment until it finds the file it is looking for. Sounds as if you had a lng restore experience, Len. As mentioned, I haven't empirically tested whether F-L-B is used in restoring part of a multiplex set (if it's used in individual-file restore, you'd think it would apply to finding the files of one backup in a mux set), but the location of every file on the tape definitely is recorded--the block numbers are field #5 in the output below: # /usr/openv/netbackup/bin/cat_convert -dump *443_INCR.f num len plendlenblknum ii raw_sz GB dev_num path data 0 0 1 50 0 0 0 0 8388728 / 16877 root root 0 1209535204 1209430138 1209430138 1 0 5 49 1 1 0 0 8388731 /usr/ 16877 root sys 0 1209535162 1208501866 1208501866 [...] 18826 107 41 53 2286045 2 0 0 8388731 /usr/openv/netbackup/bin/private/nblogcfg 33088 root bin 54048 1208506181 1195233073 1209450948 18827 80 41 53 2286152 2 0 0 8388731 /usr/openv/netbackup/bin/private/nbloggen 33088 root bin 40024 1208506181 1195233073 1209450948 18828 73 41 53 2286232 2 0 0 8388731 /usr/openv/netbackup/bin/private/nblogmgr 33088 root bin 36564 1208506181 1195233074 1209450948 18829 111 42 53 2286305 2 0 0 8388731 /usr/openv/netbackup/bin/private/nblogview 33133 root bin 56304 1208506181 1195233074 1209450948 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:veritas-bu- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of bob944 Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 9:03 PM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing on VTL's My main concern is that when doing restores off a multiplexed tape, the VTL READ speed off the disk(let's say it's 80MB/s) is the same whether there's MPX in the stream or not. The restore will throw away the bytes that doesn't belong to the client, so out of a 80 MB/s stream coming off the disk, you will throw away (let's say) 60MB and use only 20. It's this reduction in effective restore speed that's my main concern. Perhaps you'll have time to test and share here? I'd expect NetBackup to treat it as multiplexed tape and not read the intervening data. IME, most multiplexed-tape-restore horror stories are no longer valid due to a) fast-locate-block's ability to skip the intervening data (I have never explicitly tested this), b) drives that supply data faster than the client can write it and c) properly designed multiplexed backups can restore multiple clients significantly faster than non-muxed (I have tested b and c). ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Multiplexing on VTL's
We recently purchased a VTL to backup some short retention backups to. The backups will expire on the VTL and will not be duplicated to tape or anywhere else for that matter. We also have capacity licensing so we can create as many virtual tape drives as necessary. I don't believe multiplexing is necessary in a situation like this and that we would be better off configuring enough tape drives to handle the number of streams we need and turn multiplexing off. Does anyone know of any reason this logic would be flawed...and if not is there any documentation out there to support that multiplexing is not a good idea when using VTL's? ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing on VTL's
The only downside to not multiplexing is the number of drives you have to create and configure as well as the number of virtual media you have to create as well. Depending on the VTL, media can be created by allocating all the virtual cart space up front of allocating space on demand. So, if you VTL only allows you to create virtual media by using the space up front, you'll be limited in # of tapes by capacity, which might not be enough to mount into all of the virtual drives required for each stream. Other than that situation any MPX setting from 1-32 should work.. -Trey -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Travis Kelley Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 1:41 PM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing on VTL's We recently purchased a VTL to backup some short retention backups to. The backups will expire on the VTL and will not be duplicated to tape or anywhere else for that matter. We also have capacity licensing so we can create as many virtual tape drives as necessary. I don't believe multiplexing is necessary in a situation like this and that we would be better off configuring enough tape drives to handle the number of streams we need and turn multiplexing off. Does anyone know of any reason this logic would be flawed...and if not is there any documentation out there to support that multiplexing is not a good idea when using VTL's? ___ 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] Multiplexing on VTLs
values for these to improve it more - I would love to hear them also. Jason -- Jason Slagle /\ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \ / ASCII Ribbon Campaign . X - NO HTML/RTF in e-mail . / \ - NO Word docs in e-mail . On Wed, 30 Apr 2008, Justin Piszcz wrote: I am only seeing 8-10MiB/s directly from RAM (/dev/shm) where if I write the same data to an LTO-3, I see regular speeds, 60-90MiB/s no problems? ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu -- Message: 3 Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2008 14:06:06 -0400 (EDT) From: Justin Piszcz [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Anyone have any tweaks for LTO-4 and emulex cards under RHEL5? To: Jason Slagle [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Thanks btw ;) On Wed, 30 Apr 2008, Justin Piszcz wrote: Yeah yeah that was it I figured it after I sent the e-mail I was in a rush to get these new serves up and forgot about the SIZE_* vars, getting 100MiB/s per tape drive now no problems. On Wed, 30 Apr 2008, Jason Slagle wrote: Having just gone through that (Albiet with Qlogic) this is what I did: Make sure the st driver is set to a reasonable buffer size (I did this in /etc/modprobe.conf): options st buffer_kbs=1024 echo 1048576 /usr/openv/netbackup/db/config/SIZE_DATA_BUFFERS echo 1048576 /usr/openv/netbackup/db/config/SIZE_DATA_BUFFERS_DISK echo 16 /usr/openv/netbackup/db/config/NUMBER_DATA_BUFFERS echo 16 /usr/openv/netbackup/db/config/NUMBER_DATA_BUFFERS_DISK echo kernel.shmmax = 268435456 /etc/sysctl.conf echo 65536 /usr/openv/netbackup/NET_BUFFER_SZ Doing this, I am able to hit 70-80MB/s to the tape from my DSSU, and I think I COULD actually go faster, but my DSSU is limiting it. Someone else amy have better values for these to improve it more - I would love to hear them also. Jason -- Jason Slagle /\ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . \ / ASCII Ribbon Campaign . X - NO HTML/RTF in e-mail . / \ - NO Word docs in e-mail . On Wed, 30 Apr 2008, Justin Piszcz wrote: I am only seeing 8-10MiB/s directly from RAM (/dev/shm) where if I write the same data to an LTO-3, I see regular speeds, 60-90MiB/s no problems? ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu -- Message: 4 Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2008 14:40:35 -0400 From: Travis Kelley [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing on VTL's To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 We recently purchased a VTL to backup some short retention backups to. The backups will expire on the VTL and will not be duplicated to tape or anywhere else for that matter. We also have capacity licensing so we can create as many virtual tape drives as necessary. I don't believe multiplexing is necessary in a situation like this and that we would be better off configuring enough tape drives to handle the number of streams we need and turn multiplexing off. Does anyone know of any reason this logic would be flawed...and if not is there any documentation out there to support that multiplexing is not a good idea when using VTL's? -- Message: 5 Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2008 15:05:56 -0400 From: Aleksandr Nepomnyashchiy [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Veritas-bu] Best setup for NetBackup in 2 sites across the WAN link To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Dear Gurus, What is the best setup for NetBackup in 2 sites across the WAN link? I will have a tape library on each site. - Should I purchase 2 NetBackup servers and manage them separately? - Is it better (or cheaper) to purchase NetBackup server for a primary site and media manager for the remote site? Thank you, Aleksandr -- Message: 6 Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2008 16:18:43 -0400 From: Boris Kraizman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] VMotion - Supported for NBU 6.5 VCB Backups? To: David Attreed [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Did you try to use the Virtual Center instead ESX hosts? On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 1:16 PM, David Attreed [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: First post so be gentle. Am testing out VCB backups with NBU 6.5 which work absolutely fine. However, when we VMotion the host to a different ESX, NetBackup does not keep track of that action and promptly fails the next backup
Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing on VTLs
On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 5:58 PM, Mike Sparkes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: if you ever move to de-duplication, the act of multiplexing your backups ruins the ability to detect duplicate blocks. Your de-dupe ratio will be terrible. I don't follow your logic here. Why would multiplexing affect the de-dupe ratio? .../Ed -- Ed Wilts, Mounds View, MN, USA RHCE, BCFP, BCSD, SCSP mailto:[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] Multiplexing on VTL's
We recently purchased a VTL to backup some short retention backups to. The backups will expire on the VTL and will not be duplicated to tape or anywhere else for that matter. We also have capacity licensing so we can create as many virtual tape drives as necessary. I don't believe multiplexing is necessary in a situation like this and that we would be better off configuring enough tape drives to handle the number of streams we need and turn multiplexing off. Does anyone know of any reason this logic would be flawed...and if not is there any documentation out there to support that multiplexing is not a good idea when using VTL's? Good reason #1: in my VTL testing experience, making a boatload of drives from the VTL's available disk space leads (of course) to fewer or smaller tapes. And a backup that requires a dozen tapes because they're only 10GB-sized incurs a significant time penalty from all those media change times. Good reason #2: backing the number of drives down produced a need to multiplex in order to have N jobs in execution (the reason for all those virtual drives in the first place--throw a drive at every job required). Multiplexing worked fine. In non-real-world mux testing (simultaneous backups of the same directories on a media server), aggregate throughput improved all the way up to mux 32. Good reason #3: the administrative overhead of, say, 128 drives versus 16 quickly became annoying. Pages and pages of tpconfig listings going off the screen, or GUI device monitor to look through... hard to see the drive situation at a glance... process-troubleshooting... it slows things up in real and (probably) imagined ways. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing on VTL's
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of bob944 Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 4:36 PM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing on VTL's Good reason #1: in my VTL testing experience, making a boatload of drives from the VTL's available disk space leads (of course) to fewer or smaller tapes. And a backup that requires a dozen tapes because they're only 10GB-sized incurs a significant time penalty from all those media change times. === Speaking only for my NetApp VTLs here, but the 'media change time' as in 'rewind, unload drive, put tape in slot, grab a new tape from slot, put in drive, mount/position' takes next to no time at all. Fractions of a second. === Good reason #2: backing the number of drives down produced a need to multiplex in order to have N jobs in execution (the reason for all those virtual drives in the first place--throw a drive at every job required). Multiplexing worked fine. In non-real-world mux testing (simultaneous backups of the same directories on a media server), aggregate throughput improved all the way up to mux 32. === Multiplexing WILL work. In my ever so humble opinion, MPX was a band-aid to address the 'how to pipe data fast enough to fast tape drives' question. The VTL doesn't care. 1 MB/s or 100MB/s or anything in-between is fine. My main concern is that when doing restores off a multiplexed tape, the VTL READ speed off the disk(let's say it's 80MB/s) is the same whether there's MPX in the stream or not. The restore will throw away the bytes that doesn't belong to the client, so out of a 80 MB/s stream coming off the disk, you will throw away (let's say) 60MB and use only 20. It's this reduction in effective restore speed that's my main concern. A VTL without MPX _may_ be more effective at doing restores. === Good reason #3: the administrative overhead of, say, 128 drives versus 16 quickly became annoying. Pages and pages of tpconfig listings going off the screen, or GUI device monitor to look through... hard to see the drive situation at a glance... process-troubleshooting... it slows things up in real and (probably) imagined ways. === While true, my experience is that virtual drives are quite reliable. There's no write errors or read errors detected by the media servers, and they don't have reasons to DOWN their drives. (That's somewhat of a simplification... if there are SAN hiccups, media servers may down all their drives immediately...) === ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing on VTLs
On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 6:36 PM, Mike Sparkes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Multiplexing mixes streams of data from multiple sources into one stream to the storage device. A de-duplication product on that storage device will be breaking up the stream into blocks and looking for duplicate blocks. Let us assume that three backups are being multiplexed and that no data changed since the previous backup. It is unlikely that the data will mix together again at the same rate in the same ratios to create the same blocks and so they will be treated as unique and stored in full. I disagree. Multiplexing doesn't mix up the blocks coming from each server. You may see things like block 1 and 2 from server 1 followed by blocks 1, 2, and 3 from server 2, but if block 2 from server 1 is the same as block 3 from server 2, it will de-dupe. It doesn't matter what the speed is today versus yesterday - you're not de-duping the tape but you're de-duping the blocks. Duplication typically is not done by files - it's done by blocks, and that isn't changing with multiplexing. .../Ed Mike Sparkes -- *From:* Ed Wilts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *Sent:* Wednesday, April 30, 2008 4:12 PM *To:* Mike Sparkes *Cc:* veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu *Subject:* Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing on VTLs On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 5:58 PM, Mike Sparkes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: if you ever move to de-duplication, the act of multiplexing your backups ruins the ability to detect duplicate blocks. Your de-dupe ratio will be terrible. I don't follow your logic here. Why would multiplexing affect the de-dupe ratio? -- Ed Wilts, Mounds View, MN, USA RHCE, BCFP, BCSD, SCSP mailto:[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] Multiplexing on VTL's
smaller tapes. And a backup that requires a dozen tapes because they're only 10GB-sized incurs a significant time penalty from all those media change times. === Speaking only for my NetApp VTLs here, but the 'media change time' as in 'rewind, unload drive, put tape in slot, grab a new tape from slot, put in drive, mount/position' takes next to no time at all. Fractions of a second. And speaking only for the setups I was testing, I saw five to well over ten seconds, as measured in NetBackup's activity monitor. That was a surprise; I didn't pursue it as I already wasn't thrilled at having 10 times more mediaIDs to deal with, tracking a hundred or more tapes for one backup of a big server, ... No reason it wouldn't work that way; _I_ didn't want it to work that way. Good reason #2: backing the number of drives down produced a need to multiplex [...] aggregate throughput improved all the way up to mux 32. === Multiplexing WILL work. In my ever so humble opinion, MPX was a band-aid to address the 'how to pipe data fast enough to Never thought of it as a band-aid, personally. More of a way to spend on good drives and not having to upgrade network segments and backup clients that don't need the bandwidth for anything else but backup. That, and a way to make DR faster when applied intelligently. fast tape drives' question. The VTL doesn't care. 1 MB/s or 100MB/s or anything in-between is fine. Of course. The point was to get a lot of jobs in execution. 100 unmultiplexed drives or 10 drives with mux 10. Horses for courses and all that. My main concern is that when doing restores off a multiplexed tape, the VTL READ speed off the disk(let's say it's 80MB/s) is the same whether there's MPX in the stream or not. The restore will throw away the bytes that doesn't belong to the client, so out of a 80 MB/s stream coming off the disk, you will throw away (let's say) 60MB and use only 20. It's this reduction in effective restore speed that's my main concern. Perhaps you'll have time to test and share here? I'd expect NetBackup to treat it as multiplexed tape and not read the intervening data. IME, most multiplexed-tape-restore horror stories are no longer valid due to a) fast-locate-block's ability to skip the intervening data (I have never explicitly tested this), b) drives that supply data faster than the client can write it and c) properly designed multiplexed backups can restore multiple clients significantly faster than non-muxed (I have tested b and c). Good reason #3: the administrative overhead of, say, 128 drives versus 16 quickly became annoying. Pages and pages of tpconfig listings going off the screen, or GUI device monitor to look through... hard to see the drive situation at a glance... process-troubleshooting... it slows things up in real and (probably) imagined ways. === While true, my experience is that virtual drives are quite reliable. There's no write errors or read errors detected by the media servers, and they don't have reasons to DOWN their drives. (That's somewhat of a simplification... if there are SAN hiccups, media servers may down all their drives immediately...) === Buses, HBAs, ports, fibre and switches are not my area of expertise, but mis- and reconfiguration of these and some (to me) extreme distances involved were given as reasons why I saw a non-zero number of drive issues. More correctly, _didn't_ see them, as they were lost in the weeds of many hundreds of virtual drives. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing on VTL's
Hello Bob I agree with b and c, but there a can be a little misleading as we learned the hard way this past year. Netbackup records the start of a fragment and not the location of the file on the tape. So it has to read the whole fragment until it finds the file it is looking for. len -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of bob944 Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 9:03 PM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing on VTL's My main concern is that when doing restores off a multiplexed tape, the VTL READ speed off the disk(let's say it's 80MB/s) is the same whether there's MPX in the stream or not. The restore will throw away the bytes that doesn't belong to the client, so out of a 80 MB/s stream coming off the disk, you will throw away (let's say) 60MB and use only 20. It's this reduction in effective restore speed that's my main concern. Perhaps you'll have time to test and share here? I'd expect NetBackup to treat it as multiplexed tape and not read the intervening data. IME, most multiplexed-tape-restore horror stories are no longer valid due to a) fast-locate-block's ability to skip the intervening data (I have never explicitly tested this), b) drives that supply data faster than the client can write it and c) properly designed multiplexed backups can restore multiple clients significantly faster than non-muxed (I have tested b and c). ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] multiplexing file server with lots of small files
Would multi-plexing help in backing up a NFS server with millions of small files? How much would it help by? +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing Query
Assuming the retention level is same for all three jobs NetBackup will multiplex all three jobs to one single tape. Cheers Ueli Schweizer AGITE Software Zurich . West Palm Beach . London Swiss Headquarter: AGITE Software AG . Boesch 43 . CH-6331 Huenenberg . Switzerland Direct: +41 79 204 9190 . Phone: +41 41 781 5678 . Fax: +41 41 781 5677 [EMAIL PROTECTED] . http://www.AGITE-Software.com backupVISUAL ... ... we make life on backup easy -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of dy018 Sent: Monday, May 14, 2007 7:42 AM To: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing Query Hi all, Would like to find out somemore info abt multiplexing using netbackup. Example. If i have 3 clients and 3 policies for each client using same storageunit and same volume pool. My storageunit have 3 drives and i set it to 3 concurrent drive write. The policies of the 3 client i set multiplexing to 3. Question If i trigger all 3 policy all at the same time. Does netbackup do 1 or 2 assuming there are no other backup running from other media servers? 1. One drive will consolidate all 3 jobs to a single tape media? 2. One drive will be use for each job triggered, meaning the media server will use up all three drives with 3 tape media? Anyone have any idea? ___ 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] Multiplexing Query
Hi all, Would like to find out somemore info abt multiplexing using netbackup. Example. If i have 3 clients and 3 policies for each client using same storageunit and same volume pool. My storageunit have 3 drives and i set it to 3 concurrent drive write. The policies of the 3 client i set multiplexing to 3. Question If i trigger all 3 policy all at the same time. Does netbackup do 1 or 2 assuming there are no other backup running from other media servers? 1. One drive will consolidate all 3 jobs to a single tape media? 2. One drive will be use for each job triggered, meaning the media server will use up all three drives with 3 tape media? Anyone have any idea? ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Multiplexing combined with multistreaming
Brenda R. Ashley Linux/Backup-Recovery Administrator Information Handling Services 542 MSUG/GBMUAC Robins AFB Ph (478) 327-2668 DSN 497-2668 Hello All, I am having a difficult time trying to combine multiplexing with multistreaming to maximize my performance. Here's the scenario: I have Netbackup 5.1 MP5 installed on a Solaris 10 Sunfire 12 K server, which have Storedge L180 tape library attached to it using FC. 6 LTO-2 tape drives reside in L180. I have approximately 20 clients. The issue is with a Windows 2003 server that has 2 disk drives C and E. I have no problem with C:\, the problem is with E:\. E:\ has about 20 shares and is about 500 gig in size. It seems as if I have trial and error every possibility. Any feedback will be greatly appreciated. Brenda Unix/Backup-Recovery Administrator ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing combined with multistreaming
Hi Brenda, do you have OPEN FILE License on your server? Did u check about SECURITY on the DRIVE E? Be sure to have the user SYSTEM with full access in there. regards Marcos DeLima Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 13:35:07 -0400 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing combined with multistreamingBrenda R. Ashley Linux/Backup-Recovery Administrator Information Handling Services 542 MSUG/GBMUAC Robins AFB Ph (478) 327-2668 DSN 497-2668 Hello All, I am having a difficult time trying to combine multiplexing with multistreaming to maximize my performance. Here's the scenario: I have Netbackup 5.1 MP5 installed on a Solaris 10 Sunfire 12 K server, which have Storedge L180 tape library attached to it using FC. 6 LTO-2 tape drives reside in L180. I have approximately 20 clients. The issue is with a Windows 2003 server that has 2 disk drives C and E. I have no problem with C:\, the problem is with E:\. E:\ has about 20 shares and is about 500 gig in size. It seems as if I have trial and error every possibility. Any feedback will be greatly appreciated. Brenda Unix/Backup-Recovery Administrator ___ 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] Multiplexing combined with multistreaming
On 10/17/06, Ashley, Brenda R Ctr 584 CBSS/GBMUAC [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello All, I am having a difficult time trying to combine multiplexing with multistreaming to maximize my performance. Before getting too far into a solution you need to define the problem. What kind of performance are you getting now? A single LTO-2 drive easily could use up all the bandwidth available from a single Gigabit Ethernet link. Six LTO-2 drives getting fed from a single GigE link will starve and shoeshine. Here's the scenario: I have Netbackup 5.1 MP5 installed on a Solaris 10 Sunfire 12 K server, which have Storedge L180 tape library attached to it using FC. 6 LTO-2 tape drives reside in L180. I have approximately 20 clients. The issue is with a Windows 2003 server that has 2 disk drives C and E. I have no problem with C:\, the problem is with E:\. E:\ has about 20 shares and is about 500 gig in size. It seems as if I have trial and error every possibility. I'm not sure what kind of errors you are talking about, but you may have some more luck by tuning the Maximum Data Streams for that particular client. In the Java console go to: Host Properties -- Master Servers -- right click on the master -- Properties -- Client Attributes Add the name of your problematic windows 2003 system to the list and check the box for Maximum data streams, and set the number of streams to 1. Apply the changes and restart your master processes. You also have the option to adjust how the windows open file backups are performed through this window. I think the same functionality is available with the bpclient command on the master server. You may also want to think about splitting up E: into a few different backup jobs. Combined with tuning the Max data streams, you might be able to get a faster or more reliable backup jobs. Austin ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing
Simon, I won't argue that what you are seeing works for you. It will work, it's just not optimal. When you optimize your backup performance through the heavy use of multiplexing, you will sacrifice performance on restores. If you can live with that, then finego ahead and do it. However, you can get better performance on restores by restoring from a tape that has not been multiplexed. Try it sometime. This part of the equation, by the way, has absolutely nothing to do with the speed of your backbone. --stuart -Original Message- From: WEAVER, Simon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, July 31, 2006 12:26 AM To: 'Liddle, Stuart'; 'Mansell, Richard'; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing Stuart I will believe what I have seen, and the restores for the 2 SAN Media Servers are absolutely well within limits of restoring data. We run an extremely fast backbone, so I have no problems with the configuration in place. Regards Simon Weaver 3rd Line Technical Support Windows Domain Administrator EADS Astrium Limited, B23AA IM (DCS) Anchorage Road, Portsmouth, PO3 5PU Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Liddle, Stuart [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 31 July 2006 07:59 To: WEAVER, Simon; 'Mansell, Richard'; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing Simon, Finebelieve what you wantbut the numbers don't lie. If you ever try any testing of this you will see that restores are significantly faster when you do them from non-multiplexed tapes. --stuart -Original Message- From: WEAVER, Simon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, July 30, 2006 10:45 PM To: 'Liddle, Stuart'; 'Mansell, Richard'; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing Stuart Completely disagree - we get the best of both worlds and restores have never been any real issue for us, even large amounts of data across multiple tapes. Regards Simon Weaver 3rd Line Technical Support Windows Domain Administrator EADS Astrium Limited, B23AA IM (DCS) Anchorage Road, Portsmouth, PO3 5PU Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Liddle, Stuart [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 28 July 2006 19:37 To: WEAVER, Simon; 'Mansell, Richard'; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing That's good for backup speeds, but it sucks for restores. Unless all of your clients have really slow network connections, having a high multiplexing value is not really a good idea. You might want to consider dropping the multiplexing down to something like 6. Our configuration uses VTL's to our first backup copy and then I use vault to put it to physical tape. I multiplex to the VTL and single-stream to the physical tapes. Once it is on the physical tape, we have a script that will bpexpdate the copy 1 image on the VTL (this is not an automatic option in NetBackup until version 6.x). When you do a restore from a physical tape, you have a single-stream copy and not one that is multiplexedthis makes for a faster restore. --stuart -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of WEAVER, Simon Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2006 11:22 PM To: 'Mansell, Richard'; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing Richard Yes I use multiplexing a lot NBU 5.1 Master MP2 + 2 SAN Media Servers 4 drives in a robot - using SSO 1 Storage Unit set to multiplex 25 jobs per drive (Master) 2 SAN Storage Units set to use 2 drives, multiplex 8 per drive Seems to work - get a lot of jobs done - around 300 per night if that helps. Regards Simon Weaver 3rd Line Technical Support Windows Domain Administrator EADS Astrium Limited, B23AA IM (DCS) Anchorage Road, Portsmouth, PO3 5PU Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Mansell, Richard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 27 July 2006 22:31 To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing We are struggling to get all of the backups run during the backup window and one of the obvious solutions is to start using multiplexing as the tape drives are not being driven at any where near their maximum throughput. There has been a rather nasty multiplexing problem fixed in 6.0 MP3 but I would be interested to do a straw poll of how many people are using multiplexing and if possible any issues encountered. I would appreciate it if you would respond (off list) as to whether you use multiplexing or not (any version of NetBackup). I will summarise the results and post back to the list. Regards Richard ** This electronic email and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. The views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender and may not necessarily reflect
Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing
On Sun, Jul 30, 2006 at 11:58:54PM -0700, Liddle, Stuart wrote: Finebelieve what you wantbut the numbers don't lie. If you ever try any testing of this you will see that restores are significantly faster when you do them from non-multiplexed tapes. There are 2 significant factors that affect the speed the restores: 1. How many restores are you doing at the same time? If it's more than 1, then multiplexing will really hurt. 2. Are you doing single-file or multi-file restores? If it's a single-file restore, then I don't believe that multiplexing makes a lot of difference (from what I've personally seen). If you're doing a large multi-file restore, then multiplexing can cause a major performance hit. I was talking to a Legato customer last week who said that he was multiplexing 20-40 per tape and small restores could take 8+ hours. As we always say, though, test and see what's acceptable in your environment. We all trade off backup times vs restore times and what's acceptable for you may not be acceptable for me. .../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] Multiplexing
I would not multiplex to a value like 25 if only for the reason that the higher the MPX value, the greater the number of tapes over which your backup image will be distributed, and therefore, the greater the chance that a single media failure will affect a given restore... For example. 1 client with 100 Gig of data on 1 tape. That one specific tape, if it fails, will affect 1 restore, or say 2 restores if there is a second 100Gig image on a 200Gig tape. 25 clients with 100 Gig each, of Data, MPX=25. Over 200 Gig tapes, you would use ~12 tapes. If 1 of the 12 tapes is trashed, you now have 25 images you cannot restore. Also, if you get a media write error on that 1 tape/drive during a backup, you have 25 failed backups. Assuming your 25 clients are 100Mb/s network clients, each one can probably push about 8MB/s of datain a well tuned machine, you might be able to pull 8 of these clients in a single GigE NIC card on your media server, so you have to have 3 GigE cards to pull these 25 clients into your media serverwhich is more raw data than most current tape drives can writeignoring the fact that the media server's PCI busbridge are working so hard to pull data via 3 GigE cards, that it's unlikely to have enough bandwidth to properly drive the data via the HBA to the tape drive. Paul -- -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of WEAVER, Simon Sent: July 31, 2006 1:45 AM To: 'Liddle, Stuart'; 'Mansell, Richard'; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing Stuart Completely disagree - we get the best of both worlds and restores have never been any real issue for us, even large amounts of data across multiple tapes. Regards Simon Weaver 3rd Line Technical Support Windows Domain Administrator EADS Astrium Limited, B23AA IM (DCS) Anchorage Road, Portsmouth, PO3 5PU Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] Multiplexing
Or at the very least, multiplexed to a lower value than 25. However, if you are using fast tape and a slow network/clients, the slowness of the clients will obscure the performance penalty of multiplexing. I've done some testing, and got MPX = 10, and saw no performance hit for backup or restores for 100Mb/s clients.however, with high performance clients running SAN attached disk and dedicated GigE cards for backup, I saw significant performance hit between between MPX=2 and MPX=3...the difference between MPX=2 and no multiplexing was negligable. Paul -- -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Liddle, Stuart Sent: July 31, 2006 2:59 AM To: WEAVER, Simon; 'Mansell, Richard'; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing Simon, Finebelieve what you wantbut the numbers don't lie. If you ever try any testing of this you will see that restores are significantly faster when you do them from non-multiplexed tapes. --stuart 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] Multiplexing
Ed Was that restores to ALL clients, or single client ? As you say, may suit some environments, and not others (have a UNIX site that multiplex settings were VERY low and backups took 50 hours). Increased this setting, reconfigured the schedule and got this down to 13 hours! Also used a 2nd tape drive. But, may not suit everyone! I would expect restore to take a little longer though! I am glad for all of this input though (Ed, Paul, ect) as its nice to get a BETTER understanding in case, as Paul quite rightly says, something goes HORRIBLY wrong. And at the end of the day, it can only be myself to blame. But I have not chosen numbers out of a hat by the way :-) Care and planning and testing was done! Regards Simon Weaver 3rd Line Technical Support Windows Domain Administrator EADS Astrium Limited, B23AA IM (DCS) Anchorage Road, Portsmouth, PO3 5PU Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Ed Wilts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 31 July 2006 12:33 To: Liddle, Stuart Cc: WEAVER, Simon; 'Mansell, Richard'; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing On Sun, Jul 30, 2006 at 11:58:54PM -0700, Liddle, Stuart wrote: Finebelieve what you wantbut the numbers don't lie. If you ever try any testing of this you will see that restores are significantly faster when you do them from non-multiplexed tapes. There are 2 significant factors that affect the speed the restores: 1. How many restores are you doing at the same time? If it's more than 1, then multiplexing will really hurt. 2. Are you doing single-file or multi-file restores? If it's a single-file restore, then I don't believe that multiplexing makes a lot of difference (from what I've personally seen). If you're doing a large multi-file restore, then multiplexing can cause a major performance hit. I was talking to a Legato customer last week who said that he was multiplexing 20-40 per tape and small restores could take 8+ hours. As we always say, though, test and see what's acceptable in your environment. We all trade off backup times vs restore times and what's acceptable for you may not be acceptable for me. .../Ed -- Ed Wilts, Mounds View, MN, USA mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] This email is for the intended addressee only. If you have received it in error then you must not use, retain, disseminate or otherwise deal with it. Please notify the sender by return email. The views of the author may not necessarily constitute the views of Astrium Limited. Nothing in this email shall bind Astrium Limited in any contract or obligation. 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] Multiplexing
we used to multiplex until we had to duplicate images... we no longer multiplex now. that would be another reason to not multiplex (this is also a resource issue/time issue for us). if you ever had to demux from tape to tape several hundred gig... yuk"Liddle, Stuart" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Simon,Finebelieve what you wantbut the numbers don't lie. If you ever try any testing of this you will see that restores aresignificantly faster when you do them from non-multiplexed tapes.--stuart-Original Message-From: WEAVER, Simon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, July 30, 2006 10:45 PMTo: 'Liddle, Stuart'; 'Mansell, Richard'; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.eduSubject: RE: [Veritas-bu] MultiplexingStuartCompletely disagree - we get the best of both worlds and restores have neverbeen any real issue for us, even large amounts of data across multipletapes.RegardsSimon Weaver3rd Line Technical SupportWindows Domain Administrator EADS Astrium Limited, B23AA IM (DCS)Anchorage Road, Portsmouth, PO3 5PUEmail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]-Original Message-From: Liddle, Stuart [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: 28 July 2006 19:37To: WEAVER, Simon; 'Mansell, Richard'; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.eduSubject: RE: [Veritas-bu] MultiplexingThat's good for backup speeds, but it sucks for restores. Unless all ofyour clients have really slow network connections, having a highmultiplexing value is not really a good idea.You might want to consider dropping the multiplexing down to something like6. Our configuration uses VTL's to our first backup copy and then I use vaultto put it to physical tape. I multiplex to the VTL and single-stream to thephysical tapes. Once it is on the physical tape, we have a script that willbpexpdate the copy 1 image on the VTL (this is not an automatic option inNetBackup until version 6.x).When you do a restore from a physical tape, you have a single-stream copyand not one that is multiplexedthis makes for a faster restore.--stuart -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED][mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of WEAVER,SimonSent: Thursday, July 27, 2006 11:22 PMTo: 'Mansell, Richard'; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.eduSubject: Re: [Veritas-bu] MultiplexingRichardYes I use multiplexing a lotNBU 5.1 Master MP2 + 2 SAN Media Servers4 drives in a robot - using SSO1 Storage Unit set to multiplex 25 jobs per drive (Master)2 SAN Storage Units set to use 2 drives, multiplex 8 per driveSeems to work - get a lot of jobs done - around 300 per night if that helps.RegardsSimon Weaver3rd Line Technical SupportWindows Domain Administrator EADS Astrium Limited, B23AA IM (DCS)Anchorage Road, Portsmouth, PO3 5PUEmail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]-Original Message-From: Mansell, Richard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: 27 July 2006 22:31To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.eduSubject: [Veritas-bu] MultiplexingWe are struggling to get all of the backups run during the backup window andone of the obvious solutions is to start using multiplexing as the tapedrives are not being driven at any where near their maximum throughput.There has been a rather nasty multiplexing problem fixed in 6.0 MP3 but Iwould be interested to do a straw poll of how many people are usingmultiplexing and if possible any issues encountered.I would appreciate it if you would respond (off list) as to whether you usemultiplexing or not (any version of NetBackup). I will summarise the resultsand post back to the list.RegardsRichard**This electronic email and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. The views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of the Christchurch CityCouncil.If you are not the correct recipient of this email please advise the senderand delete.Christchurch City Councilhttp://www.ccc.govt.nz**___Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.eduhttp://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-buThis email is for the intended addressee only.If you have received it in error then you must not use, retain, disseminateor otherwise deal with it. Please notify the sender by return email. Theviews of the author may not necessarily constitute the views of AstriumLimited. Nothing in this email shall bind Astrium Limited in any contract orobligation.Astrium Limited, Registered in England and Wales No. 2449259 RegisteredOffice: Gunnels Wood Road, Stevenage, Hertfordshire, SG1 2AS, England___Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.eduhttp://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-buThis email is for the intended addressee only.If you have received it in error then you must not use, retain, disseminateor otherwise deal with it.Please
Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing
If it's within your required parameters, then it's OK. It's obviously and trivially true that restoring from mulitplexed tapes is slower, because the drive has to read data that's not required to get to the data that is. I don't agree. Yes, the tape has to read more data, but if that new speed is still higher than the restore speed the client can consume (whether limited by network, disk/filesystem, or client performance), then the multiplexing has no effect on restore speed. -- Darren Dunham [EMAIL PROTECTED] Senior Technical Consultant TAOShttp://www.taos.com/ Got some Dr Pepper? San Francisco, CA bay area This line left intentionally blank to confuse you. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing
Probably the best reason for not multiplexing is that an un-multiplexed tape can be read using gnu tar in a worst case scenario. Patrick Whelan NetBackup Specialist Architect Engineering +44 20 7863 5243 Of all the things I've lost, I miss my mind the most! - Unknown There are only 10 kinds of people on earth - those who understand binary and those who don't. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Keating Sent: 31 July 2006 14:16 To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing Or at the very least, multiplexed to a lower value than 25. However, if you are using fast tape and a slow network/clients, the slowness of the clients will obscure the performance penalty of multiplexing. I've done some testing, and got MPX = 10, and saw no performance hit for backup or restores for 100Mb/s clients.however, with high performance clients running SAN attached disk and dedicated GigE cards for backup, I saw significant performance hit between between MPX=2 and MPX=3...the difference between MPX=2 and no multiplexing was negligable. Paul -- -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Liddle, Stuart Sent: July 31, 2006 2:59 AM To: WEAVER, Simon; 'Mansell, Richard'; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing Simon, Finebelieve what you wantbut the numbers don't lie. If you ever try any testing of this you will see that restores are significantly faster when you do them from non-multiplexed tapes. --stuart * The message is intended for the named addressee only and may not be disclosed to or used by anyone else, nor may it be copied in any way. The contents of this message and its attachments are confidential and may also be subject to legal privilege. If you are not the named addressee and/or have received this message in error, please advise us by e-mailing [EMAIL PROTECTED] and delete the message and any attachments without retaining any copies. Internet communications are not secure and COLT does not accept responsibility for this message, its contents nor responsibility for any viruses. No contracts can be created or varied on behalf of COLT Telecommunications, its subsidiaries or affiliates (COLT) and any other party by email Communications unless expressly agreed in writing with such other party. Please note that incoming emails will be automatically scanned to eliminate potential viruses and unsolicited promotional emails. For more information refer to www.colt.net or contact us on +44(0)20 7390 3900. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing
Stuart Completely disagree - we get the best of both worlds and restores have never been any real issue for us, even large amounts of data across multiple tapes. Regards Simon Weaver 3rd Line Technical Support Windows Domain Administrator EADS Astrium Limited, B23AA IM (DCS) Anchorage Road, Portsmouth, PO3 5PU Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Liddle, Stuart [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 28 July 2006 19:37 To: WEAVER, Simon; 'Mansell, Richard'; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing That's good for backup speeds, but it sucks for restores. Unless all of your clients have really slow network connections, having a high multiplexing value is not really a good idea. You might want to consider dropping the multiplexing down to something like 6. Our configuration uses VTL's to our first backup copy and then I use vault to put it to physical tape. I multiplex to the VTL and single-stream to the physical tapes. Once it is on the physical tape, we have a script that will bpexpdate the copy 1 image on the VTL (this is not an automatic option in NetBackup until version 6.x). When you do a restore from a physical tape, you have a single-stream copy and not one that is multiplexedthis makes for a faster restore. --stuart -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of WEAVER, Simon Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2006 11:22 PM To: 'Mansell, Richard'; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing Richard Yes I use multiplexing a lot NBU 5.1 Master MP2 + 2 SAN Media Servers 4 drives in a robot - using SSO 1 Storage Unit set to multiplex 25 jobs per drive (Master) 2 SAN Storage Units set to use 2 drives, multiplex 8 per drive Seems to work - get a lot of jobs done - around 300 per night if that helps. Regards Simon Weaver 3rd Line Technical Support Windows Domain Administrator EADS Astrium Limited, B23AA IM (DCS) Anchorage Road, Portsmouth, PO3 5PU Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Mansell, Richard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 27 July 2006 22:31 To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing We are struggling to get all of the backups run during the backup window and one of the obvious solutions is to start using multiplexing as the tape drives are not being driven at any where near their maximum throughput. There has been a rather nasty multiplexing problem fixed in 6.0 MP3 but I would be interested to do a straw poll of how many people are using multiplexing and if possible any issues encountered. I would appreciate it if you would respond (off list) as to whether you use multiplexing or not (any version of NetBackup). I will summarise the results and post back to the list. Regards Richard ** This electronic email and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. The views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of the Christchurch City Council. If you are not the correct recipient of this email please advise the sender and delete. Christchurch City Council http://www.ccc.govt.nz ** ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu This email is for the intended addressee only. If you have received it in error then you must not use, retain, disseminate or otherwise deal with it. Please notify the sender by return email. The views of the author may not necessarily constitute the views of Astrium Limited. Nothing in this email shall bind Astrium Limited in any contract or obligation. 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 This email is for the intended addressee only. If you have received it in error then you must not use, retain, disseminate or otherwise deal with it. Please notify the sender by return email. The views of the author may not necessarily constitute the views of Astrium Limited. Nothing in this email shall bind Astrium Limited in any contract or obligation. 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] Multiplexing
Richard Yes I use multiplexing a lot NBU 5.1 Master MP2 + 2 SAN Media Servers 4 drives in a robot - using SSO 1 Storage Unit set to multiplex 25 jobs per drive (Master) 2 SAN Storage Units set to use 2 drives, multiplex 8 per drive Seems to work - get a lot of jobs done - around 300 per night if that helps. Regards Simon Weaver 3rd Line Technical Support Windows Domain Administrator EADS Astrium Limited, B23AA IM (DCS) Anchorage Road, Portsmouth, PO3 5PU Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Mansell, Richard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 27 July 2006 22:31 To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing We are struggling to get all of the backups run during the backup window and one of the obvious solutions is to start using multiplexing as the tape drives are not being driven at any where near their maximum throughput. There has been a rather nasty multiplexing problem fixed in 6.0 MP3 but I would be interested to do a straw poll of how many people are using multiplexing and if possible any issues encountered. I would appreciate it if you would respond (off list) as to whether you use multiplexing or not (any version of NetBackup). I will summarise the results and post back to the list. Regards Richard ** This electronic email and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. The views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of the Christchurch City Council. If you are not the correct recipient of this email please advise the sender and delete. Christchurch City Council http://www.ccc.govt.nz ** ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu This email is for the intended addressee only. If you have received it in error then you must not use, retain, disseminate or otherwise deal with it. Please notify the sender by return email. The views of the author may not necessarily constitute the views of Astrium Limited. Nothing in this email shall bind Astrium Limited in any contract or obligation. 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
[Veritas-bu] Multiplexing
We are struggling to get all of the backups run during the backup window and one of the obvious solutions is to start using multiplexing as the tape drives are not being driven at any where near their maximum throughput. There has been a rather nasty multiplexing problem fixed in 6.0 MP3 but I would be interested to do a straw poll of how many people are using multiplexing and if possible any issues encountered. I would appreciate it if you would respond (off list) as to whether you use multiplexing or not (any version of NetBackup). I will summarise the results and post back to the list. Regards Richard ** This electronic email and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. The views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of the Christchurch City Council. If you are not the correct recipient of this email please advise the sender and delete. Christchurch City Council http://www.ccc.govt.nz ** ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing problem
yes that's all. but don't forget if you change one of them should be restart NBU . joeJerry Vochteloo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: These things will determine if multiple jobs runMultiplexing in the storage unitMultiplexing in the scheduleMax jobs/clients (global) set to more then one (if you are also multistreaming)Max jobs this clientMax jobs per policy Number of drives in STUMax of concurrent drives used for backupVery configurable, right :)If any of these are set to one, then you won't get multiple jobs. Btw if you do make changes, make sure that bpsched (ifyou are running 5.x) has died before running them againCheers--Jerry Vochteloow: +61-2-8220-7043, m: +61 408 206 748The opinions stated here are mine and do not necessarily represent those ofSymantec Corp-Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of AsiyeYigitSent: Thursday, 6 July 2006 11:18 PMTo: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.eduSubject: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing problemHi All,I have a problem. Even though I have set all requirements for multiplexing, the items on my backup selection list areentering in queue. I would expect that they will be running simultaneously. What am I missing?Regards,Asiye___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.eduhttp://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and 30+ countries) for 2¢/min or less.___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Multiplexing problem
Hi All, I have a problem. Even though I have set all requirements for multiplexing, the items on my backup selection list are entering in queue. I would expect that they will be running simultaneously. What am I missing? Regards, Asiye ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing problem
Make sure the drive/storage unit can accept more than 1 stream simultaneously. Make sure the schedule has media multiplexing enabled and a number higher than 1. -Jonathan -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Asiye Yigit Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2006 9:18 AM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing problem Hi All, I have a problem. Even though I have set all requirements for multiplexing, the items on my backup selection list are entering in queue. I would expect that they will be running simultaneously. What am I missing? Regards, Asiye ___ 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] Multiplexing problem
It seems to be okay. I am getting crayz.. I could not find the what my problem is. Regards, -Original Message- From: Martin, Jonathan (Contractor) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2006 4:56 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing problem Make sure the drive/storage unit can accept more than 1 stream simultaneously. Make sure the schedule has media multiplexing enabled and a number higher than 1. -Jonathan -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Asiye Yigit Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2006 9:18 AM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing problem Hi All, I have a problem. Even though I have set all requirements for multiplexing, the items on my backup selection list are entering in queue. I would expect that they will be running simultaneously. What am I missing? Regards, Asiye ___ 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] Multiplexing problem
Make sure jobs are set to max of 99 - ensure storage unit multiplexing per drive is set to a high value In the SCHEDULE of the policy, ensure multiplexing is set to a high value - not as high as the storage unit if poss ! HTH Ie: Storage multiplex is 12 - schedule policy set to 6 - so 6 streams sent to 2 drives - assuming 2 drives are available :-) Regards Simon Weaver 3rd Line Technical Support Windows Domain Administrator EADS Astrium Limited, B32AA IM (DCS) Anchorage Road, Portsmouth, PO3 5PU Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Asiye Yigit [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 06 July 2006 14:18 To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing problem Hi All, I have a problem. Even though I have set all requirements for multiplexing, the items on my backup selection list are entering in queue. I would expect that they will be running simultaneously. What am I missing? Regards, Asiye ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu This email is for the intended addressee only. If you have received it in error then you must not use, retain, disseminate or otherwise deal with it. Please notify the sender by return email. The views of the author may not necessarily constitute the views of EADS Astrium Limited. Nothing in this email shall bind EADS Astrium Limited in any contract or obligation. EADS 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] Multiplexing problem
A couple things to keep in mind that can trip you up w/ multiplexing (and have done so to me in the past): 1) Configuration - The tape drive needs to be set up to multiplex and, if you really want to get the most bang for the buck, the policy should be set to multistream as well. 2) Media retention levels - you cannot multiplex policies with different retention levels to a single tape. f you have 3 policies w/ retention levels 2, 3, and 3, only the latter two will run if the tape in the drive is an RL3 tape. -Shane On 7/6/06, WEAVER, Simon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Make sure jobs are set to max of 99 - ensure storage unit multiplexing per drive is set to a high value In the SCHEDULE of the policy, ensure multiplexing is set to a high value - not as high as the storage unit if poss ! HTH Ie: Storage multiplex is 12 - schedule policy set to 6 - so 6 streams sent to 2 drives - assuming 2 drives are available :-) Regards Simon Weaver 3rd Line Technical Support Windows Domain Administrator EADS Astrium Limited, B32AA IM (DCS) Anchorage Road, Portsmouth, PO3 5PU Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Asiye Yigit [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 06 July 2006 14:18 To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing problem Hi All, I have a problem. Even though I have set all requirements for multiplexing, the items on my backup selection list are entering in queue. I would expect that they will be running simultaneously. What am I missing? Regards, Asiye ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu This email is for the intended addressee only. If you have received it in error then you must not use, retain, disseminate or otherwise deal with it. Please notify the sender by return email. The views of the author may not necessarily constitute the views of EADS Astrium Limited. Nothing in this email shall bind EADS Astrium Limited in any contract or obligation. EADS 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 ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing problem
These things will determine if multiple jobs run Multiplexing in the storage unit Multiplexing in the schedule Max jobs/clients (global) set to more then one (if you are also multistreaming) Max jobs this client Max jobs per policy Number of drives in STU Max of concurrent drives used for backup Very configurable, right :) If any of these are set to one, then you won't get multiple jobs. Btw if you do make changes, make sure that bpsched (if you are running 5.x) has died before running them again Cheers -- Jerry Vochteloo w: +61-2-8220-7043, m: +61 408 206 748 The opinions stated here are mine and do not necessarily represent those of Symantec Corp -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Asiye Yigit Sent: Thursday, 6 July 2006 11:18 PM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing problem Hi All, I have a problem. Even though I have set all requirements for multiplexing, the items on my backup selection list are entering in queue. I would expect that they will be running simultaneously. What am I missing? Regards, Asiye ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] multiplexing
Title: multiplexing Can someone explain what this does? How can I backup data and have it stripped across more drives to speed a back up faster? We are having a discussion about this and how multiplexing works versus data streaming. Thanks Greg This e-mail and any attachments are confidential, may contain legal, professional or other privileged information, and are intended solely for the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, do not use the information in this e-mail in any way, delete this e-mail and notify the sender. CEG-IP1 ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] multiplexing
just the opposite. multiplexing is the practice of writing multiple backup jobs simultaneously to one tape/drive, interleaving segments of each backup on the tape. Multiplexing is beneficial when you have new technology tape drives that write 40+ MB/s natively, and clients that just can't push that much data out. In most cases with new tape drive technology the problem is that tapedrives are TOO fast, rather than not being fast enough. If you want to pull multiple streams of data from one client and stripe it across multiple drives, that is known as multi-STREAMING. Paul -- -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Hindle, Greg Sent: June 23, 2006 11:21 AM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] multiplexing Can someone explain what this does? How can I backup data and have it stripped across more drives to speed a back up faster? We are having a discussion about this and how multiplexing works versus data streaming. Thanks 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] multiplexing
And where is the settling for multi streaming? Greg -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Keating Sent: Friday, June 23, 2006 11:32 AM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] multiplexing just the opposite. multiplexing is the practice of writing multiple backup jobs simultaneously to one tape/drive, interleaving segments of each backup on the tape. Multiplexing is beneficial when you have new technology tape drives that write 40+ MB/s natively, and clients that just can't push that much data out. In most cases with new tape drive technology the problem is that tapedrives are TOO fast, rather than not being fast enough. If you want to pull multiple streams of data from one client and stripe it across multiple drives, that is known as multi-STREAMING. Paul -- -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Hindle, Greg Sent: June 23, 2006 11:21 AM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] multiplexing Can someone explain what this does? How can I backup data and have it stripped across more drives to speed a back up faster? We are having a discussion about this and how multiplexing works versus data streaming. Thanks This e-mail and any attachments are confidential, may contain legal, professional or other privileged information, and are intended solely for the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, do not use the information in this e-mail in any way, delete this e-mail and notify the sender. CEG-IP2 ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] multiplexing
As mentioned... In the Policy and look at the Schedule properties. And then the Storage Unit ! Regards Simon Weaver 3rd Line Technical Support Windows Domain Administrator EADS Astrium Limited, B32AA IM (DCS) Anchorage Road, Portsmouth, PO3 5PU Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Hindle, Greg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 23 June 2006 16:36 To: Paul Keating; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] multiplexing And where is the settling for multi streaming? Greg -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Keating Sent: Friday, June 23, 2006 11:32 AM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] multiplexing just the opposite. multiplexing is the practice of writing multiple backup jobs simultaneously to one tape/drive, interleaving segments of each backup on the tape. Multiplexing is beneficial when you have new technology tape drives that write 40+ MB/s natively, and clients that just can't push that much data out. In most cases with new tape drive technology the problem is that tapedrives are TOO fast, rather than not being fast enough. If you want to pull multiple streams of data from one client and stripe it across multiple drives, that is known as multi-STREAMING. Paul -- -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Hindle, Greg Sent: June 23, 2006 11:21 AM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] multiplexing Can someone explain what this does? How can I backup data and have it stripped across more drives to speed a back up faster? We are having a discussion about this and how multiplexing works versus data streaming. Thanks This e-mail and any attachments are confidential, may contain legal, professional or other privileged information, and are intended solely for the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, do not use the information in this e-mail in any way, delete this e-mail and notify the sender. CEG-IP2 ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu This email is for the intended addressee only. If you have received it in error then you must not use, retain, disseminate or otherwise deal with it. Please notify the sender by return email. The views of the author may not necessarily constitute the views of EADS Astrium Limited. Nothing in this email shall bind EADS Astrium Limited in any contract or obligation. EADS 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] multiplexing
Policy - Attributes Tab. Applies to all clients in that policy. If you check that box and back up clients using the ALL_LOCAL_DRIVES directive, each client will spawn multiple jobs, one per filesystem, or you can manually controll the streams using something like the following in your backup selections tab: NEW_STREAM C:\ NEW_STREAM D:\ The if you want the individual streams to go to separate tape drives, you'd want to set multiplex level to 1 in either the policy - schedule or in the Storage unit that policy is assigned to. However, unless you have really slow tape drives, you probably aren't going to want to do this. A client with 6 filesystems can use 6 drives simultaneously, and NONE of those drives is gonna be streaming. Paul -- -Original Message- From: Hindle, Greg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: June 23, 2006 11:36 AM To: Paul Keating; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] multiplexing And where is the settling for multi streaming? Greg -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Keating Sent: Friday, June 23, 2006 11:32 AM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] multiplexing just the opposite. multiplexing is the practice of writing multiple backup jobs simultaneously to one tape/drive, interleaving segments of each backup on the tape. Multiplexing is beneficial when you have new technology tape drives that write 40+ MB/s natively, and clients that just can't push that much data out. In most cases with new tape drive technology the problem is that tapedrives are TOO fast, rather than not being fast enough. If you want to pull multiple streams of data from one client and stripe it across multiple drives, that is known as multi-STREAMING. Paul -- -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Hindle, Greg Sent: June 23, 2006 11:21 AM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] multiplexing Can someone explain what this does? How can I backup data and have it stripped across more drives to speed a back up faster? We are having a discussion about this and how multiplexing works versus data streaming. Thanks This e-mail and any attachments are confidential, may contain legal, professional or other privileged information, and are intended solely for the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, do not use the information in this e-mail in any way, delete this e-mail and notify the sender. CEG-IP2 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] Multiplexing / Streaming
Simon I believe this will happen - Your first job will kick off at 6PM with 3 streams. All these streams will go to one tape drive, because you have the MPX value on the schedule set at 3. The second policy will start at 7PM and generate another 3 streams. All these streams will go to a second tape drive, for the same reason. With the schedule's MPX setting at 3, you will never get more than 3 streams going to the drive that that schedule is backing up to, regardless of what MPX setting you have on the storage unit. I always set the MPX value on the schedule to the maximum (32 if I recall correctly) and manage the number of streams at the storage unit level. We could could give more specific real-world advice if we knew exactly what you are trying to do. Are the clients IP connected, or are they media servers? If IP, what network speed? What kind of tape drives? Do you want to be able to spread the I/O out across all 5 tape drives? Cheers Dean On 11/2/05, WEAVER, Simon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi can I have some opinions please?I am deeply concerned about backup speeds, and trying to get my head aroundstreaming and multiplexing.I have 3 available tape drives and I have 2 policies that I intend to run tonight. I want both policies to use the available drives where possible.I have told NBU I have 5 drives available - 2 are offline at the moment, but3 are readily there.The 1st policy will start at 6pm and contains 3 streams The 2nd Policy starts at 7pm and contains 3 streams.Both of the policies both state Media Multiplexing is set for 3NBU Master Storage Unit is set for Max Multiplexing per drive is 6. Does this sound right or have I missed the point?Thank you for any input!SimonThis email is for the intended addressee only.If you have received it in error then you must not use, retain, disseminate or otherwise deal with it. Please notify the sender by return email.The views of the author may not necessarily constitute the views of EADS Astrium Limited.Nothing in this email shall bind EADS Astrium Limited in any contract or obligation. EADS Astrium Limited, Registered in England and Wales No. 2449259Registered Office: Gunnels Wood Road, Stevenage, Hertfordshire, SG1 2AS, England___Veritas-bu maillist- Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.eduhttp://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Antw: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing / Streaming
Hi Simon It's seems right but you should still to enable in Attribute's policy - Allow multiple data streams Regards, Jerome WEAVER, Simon [EMAIL PROTECTED] 02.11.2005 12:37:02 Hi can I have some opinions please? I am deeply concerned about backup speeds, and trying to get my head around streaming and multiplexing. I have 3 available tape drives and I have 2 policies that I intend to run tonight. I want both policies to use the available drives where possible. I have told NBU I have 5 drives available - 2 are offline at the moment, but 3 are readily there. The 1st policy will start at 6pm and contains 3 streams The 2nd Policy starts at 7pm and contains 3 streams. Both of the policies both state Media Multiplexing is set for 3 NBU Master Storage Unit is set for Max Multiplexing per drive is 6. Does this sound right or have I missed the point? Thank you for any input! Simon This email is for the intended addressee only. If you have received it in error then you must not use, retain, disseminate or otherwise deal with it. Please notify the sender by return email. The views of the author may not necessarily constitute the views of EADS Astrium Limited. Nothing in this email shall bind EADS Astrium Limited in any contract or obligation. EADS 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 ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
RE: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing / Streaming
This can be a hairy subject. Why do you want to use this option, before I start. Best Regards, Darby Moses -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of WEAVER, Simon Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 6:37 AM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Multiplexing / Streaming Hi can I have some opinions please? I am deeply concerned about backup speeds, and trying to get my head around streaming and multiplexing. I have 3 available tape drives and I have 2 policies that I intend to run tonight. I want both policies to use the available drives where possible. I have told NBU I have 5 drives available - 2 are offline at the moment, but 3 are readily there. The 1st policy will start at 6pm and contains 3 streams The 2nd Policy starts at 7pm and contains 3 streams. Both of the policies both state Media Multiplexing is set for 3 NBU Master Storage Unit is set for Max Multiplexing per drive is 6. Does this sound right or have I missed the point? Thank you for any input! Simon This email is for the intended addressee only. If you have received it in error then you must not use, retain, disseminate or otherwise deal with it. Please notify the sender by return email. The views of the author may not necessarily constitute the views of EADS Astrium Limited. Nothing in this email shall bind EADS Astrium Limited in any contract or obligation. EADS 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 ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
