Re: [Veritas-bu] netbackup 6.5: socket read failed ??

[Rusty Major]

Two comments I'd like to add:

1) Putting path statements in your environment to all the different
directories of NBU commands (and other commands) just makes your life so
much easier.
2) The bptestbpcd command has an undocumented option: -debug
Using bptestbpcd -client  -debug will print out a ton
of information and will better help you pinpoint the problem without
having to run a testbackup, at least from a communication between
master/media and client standpoint.


-Original Message-
From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
[mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of rico78
Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2011 12:47 PM
To: VERITAS-BU@MAILMAN.ENG.AUBURN.EDU
Subject: [Veritas-bu] netbackup 6.5: socket read failed ??

yep!

I think Daniel you summarize exatly the problem:reverse lookup failing
  :)

A big thankful thanks

+--
|This was sent by edesam...@opentv.com via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com.
+--


___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] netbackup 6.5: socket read failed ??

[Daniel Otto]

Bingo you have a reverse lookup failing for the incoming IP address 
192.168.x.x. 
On the client run the command- 
C:\Program files\VERITAS\netbackup\bin:bpclntcmd -ip 192.168.x.x (The actual IP 
address I assume not x's) 

It will fail. Then in the client's host file add that IP and the master server 
hostname. So long as that hostname in defined as a server on the client you 
should be able to connect. If you get a status 59 or 46 then the master server 
hostname is not defined correctly on the client.

-Original Message-
From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu 
[mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of rico78
Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2011 12:24 PM
To: VERITAS-BU@MAILMAN.ENG.AUBURN.EDU
Subject: [Veritas-bu] netbackup 6.5: socket read failed ??

Also, I ran again a bpcd command form the client, and I get this:

18:58:41.753 [3328.2604] <16> bpcd peer_hostname: gethostbyaddr failed to 
return peer host, herrno = 0
18:58:41.753 [3328.2604] <16> bpcd main: Couldn't get peer hostname
19:01:53.774 [3572.2728] <2> bpcd main: offset to GMT -3600
19:01:53.774 [3572.2728] <2> bpcd main: Got socket for input 472
19:01:53.789 [3572.2728] <2> logconnections: BPCD ACCEPT FROM 192.168.0.x.56646 
TO 192.168.0.y.13724
19:01:53.789 [3572.2728] <2> bpcd main: setup_sockopts complete
19:01:58.305 [3572.2728] <8> bpcd peer_hostname: gethostbyaddr failed : The 
requested name is valid, but no data of the requested type was found.

 (0)
19:01:58.305 [3572.2728] <16> bpcd peer_hostname: gethostbyaddr failed to 
return peer host, herrno = 0
19:01:58.305 [3572.2728] <16> bpcd main: Couldn't get peer hostname
19:16:30.196 [3876.3880] <2> bpcd main: offset to GMT -3600
19:16:30.212 [3876.3880] <2> bpcd main: Got socket for input 3
19:16:30.212 [3876.3880] <2> logconnections: getsockname(3) failed: 10038
19:16:30.212 [3876.3880] <16> bpcd setup_sockopts: setsockopt 2 failed: h_errno 
10038
19:16:30.212 [3876.3880] <2> bpcd main: setup_sockopts complete
19:16:30.212 [3876.3880] <2> vauth_acceptor: ..\libvlibs\vauth_comm.c.307: 
Function failed: 17 0x0011
19:16:30.212 [3876.3880] <16> bpcd main: authentication failed: 17

So it seems taht at one stage, the bpcd connection worked, but fails after! 
(ps: 192.168.0.x is the ip address of the nb master server)

yet, what this error means:
 <8> bpcd peer_hostname: gethostbyaddr failed : The requested name is valid, 
but no data of the requested type was found.

bad dns resolution?

+--
|This was sent by edesam...@opentv.com via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com.
+--


___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] netbackup 6.5: socket read failed ??

[Lavelle, Michael F]

 2.6.16.60-0.21-smp Linux# which bptestbpcd
/usr/openv/netbackup/bin/admincmd/bptestbpcd

-Original Message-
From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu 
[mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of rico78
Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2011 11:54 AM
To: VERITAS-BU@MAILMAN.ENG.AUBURN.EDU
Subject: [Veritas-bu] netbackup 6.5: socket read failed ??

Hey!

Well I would love to run the command from your NetBackup server 
"bptestbpcd -client< clientname>"  but the command isn't available in 
/opentv/netbackup/bin?

Is there an additionnal package to install?


Are the firewalls of server and client open in both directions for port 
13724?

Well to be sure no firewall was causing any blocking issues, I ran the command
svcadm disable svc:/network/ipfilter:default on the solaris sever 
and also disable completely the windows firewall on the windows server 2003 
client!

If using DNS (why aren't you using DNS?!), make sure forward and reverse 
DNS lookups work.

After, I do use DNS, but I also added the host/IP in the host files of each 
client/server.
dns lookup works well

Ensure the NetBackup server(s) is/are properly  listed in the client 
configuration.

How do you check that? Just looking in the backup, Archive and REstore 
interface? If yes, the netbackup server is ok!

For Windows, ensure the NetBackup Client Service is started on the client.

Checked it, and it's ok!

For Windows, does the domain controller know of the NetBackup servers?

in term of IP ? or in term of user authorization,

  If multiple paths (IP addresses) are available, ensure NetBackup uses the 
path you want 
I've got only one nic enable for the moment


One thing however: on the windows client, when I run the bpcd command, it 
generates the following log:

18:37:59.550 [3396.3636] <2> bpcd main: offset to GMT -3600
18:37:59.550 [3396.3636] <2> bpcd main: Got socket for input 3
18:37:59.550 [3396.3636] <2> logconnections: getsockname(3) failed: 10038
18:37:59.550 [3396.3636] <16> bpcd setup_sockopts: setsockopt 2 failed: h_errno 
10038
18:37:59.550 [3396.3636] <2> bpcd main: setup_sockopts complete
18:37:59.550 [3396.3636] <2> vauth_acceptor: ..\libvlibs\vauth_comm.c.307: 
Function failed: 17 0x0011
18:37:59.550 [3396.3636] <16> bpcd main: authentication failed: 17


What to think about this?

+--
|This was sent by edesam...@opentv.com via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com.
+--


___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] netbackup 6.5: socket read failed ??

[Wayne T Smith]

Assuming you're using the standard "vnetd" communication, port 13782 is no
longer required as it was with version 5/5.1 ... just port 13724.

>From your NetBackup server(s), run "bptestbpcd -client< clientname>" for
each client.  Telnet on port 13724 will work, too, but the response is not
as clear (as you have found ... the connection will NOT drop in 5 seconds
if all is OK).

If there are problems, I look at these


   - Are the firewalls of server and client open in both directions for
   port 13724?
   - If using DNS (why aren't you using DNS?!), make sure forward and
   reverse DNS lookups work.
   - Ensure the NetBackup server(s) is/are properly  listed in the client
   configuration.
   - For Windows, ensure the NetBackup Client Service is started on the
   client.
   - For Windows, does the domain controller know of the NetBackup servers?
   - If multiple paths (IP addresses) are available, ensure NetBackup uses
   the path you want


This catches nearly all setup problems I have.

Cheers, Wayne


On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 11:55 AM, rico78 wrote:

> Hi folks,
>
> Back again with my problems!
> I've got a solaris 5.10 server with Netbackup 6.5 (which hostname is
> master_server for the example) on which I'm trying to configure the clients!
>
> I've got one client , called for instance win2003_client1 under windows
> 2003 on which I installed the netbackup client.
>
> From the NB java console in the host properties,  I can see in the client
> properties that server win2003_client1 but I can't establish a
> communication.
> I get error:
>
> socket read failed (status 23)
>
> Yet, from the Netbackup master server, I can ping  win2003_client1! The
> hostname of the client is well resolved!
> I followed alos the instructions (
> http://www.symantec.com/business/support/index?page=content&id=TECH54563&key=15143&actp=LIST)
> given by Netbackup on possible dns issues:
> I added in /etc/hosts on the master server the hostname and ip address of
> the client, and on the client, I added in
> %SystemRoot%\system32\drivers\etc\hosts the master server ip address and
> hostname
>
> From the master server:
> - when I do a bpclntcmd -hn win2003_client1, it returns the correct
> information on ip address and name
> - a telnet win2003_client1 13782 does connect (is it normal however that
> the telnet session ends after 5 sec?ie connection closed by foreign host)
>
> From the windows client:
> - a telnet master_server 13782 does connect well
> - command bpclntcmd -pn returns
>  'expected response from server master_server
>  win2003_client1 win2003_client1 192.168.x.y 1267
>
> Any other suggestion to look at why the connection can't be done?
>
> Thanks in advance!
>
> +--
> |This was sent by edesam...@opentv.com via Backup Central.
> |Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com.
> +--
>
>
> ___
> Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
> http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
>
___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] netbackup 6.5: can't find any media device ??

[Rusty Major]

If none of that leads to anything, you will need to follow these high
level steps:

This is all discussed in the NetBackup Device Configuration Guide. I
highly recommend reading that.

Connect or zone the robot and drive(s) to the server, this may require a
reboot if SCSI attached
Execute devfsadm -c tape on the server
Make a copy of the existing /kernel/drv/st.conf file
Edit the st.conf file to add lines to support the number of SCSI devices
or enable FC tape support if needed
Navigate to the /usr/openv/volmgr/bin/driver directory
Edit the existing sg.conf and sg.links files in this directory to add your
devices
Run the sg.install file (if you are prompted to to rm -f the sg driver, do
so and re-run sg.install)
Verify sgscan and scan now pick up the devices
If not, they have not been configured properly and you will need to figure
out the issue and redo these steps
Run the Device Confiuration Wizard and it should find your robot and
drive(s) and configure them for you

-Rusty

-Original Message-
From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
[mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of SIBLEY,
Ken R. - ACCOR-NA
Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2011 9:59 AM
To: VERITAS-BU@MAILMAN.ENG.AUBURN.EDU
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] netbackup 6.5: can't find any media device ??

Any chance you are using Sol10 U5?  If so then read this article from HP
about disappearing libraries/drives.

http://h2.www2.hp.com/bizsupport/TechSupport/Document.jsp?lang=en&cc=u
s&taskId=110&prodSeriesId=463702&prodTypeId=12169&objectID=c01536454

Ken

> -Original Message-
> From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu [mailto:veritas-bu-
> boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of rico78
> Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2011 9:57 AM
> To: VERITAS-BU@MAILMAN.ENG.AUBURN.EDU
> Subject: [Veritas-bu] netbackup 6.5: can't find any media device ??
>
> Did you install the netbackup sg driver?
>
> Which drivers are you using?
>
> Hmm I guess no!  :(
> I'm using the default SCSA installed with Solaris:
>
>
> # /usr/sbin/modinfo |grep sg
> 142 f01cb000   1af8  97   1  sysmsg (System message redirection
(fan)
> 222 f0a75000   2e70 231   1  sg (SCSA Generic Revision: 3.6)
> 233 f09e2000   29d8  49   1  msgsys (System V message facility)
> 233 f09e2000   29d8  49   1  msgsys (32-bit System V message
facilit)
> 238 f0116000   4140 145   1  sgen (SCSI generic driver 1.11)
> #
>
>
> So I need to the one that comes with netbackup then?
>
> Regards,
>
> +-
> +-
> |This was sent by edesam...@opentv.com via Backup Central.
> |Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com.
> +-
> +-
>
>
> ___
> Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
> http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
___
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] netbackup 6.5: can't find any media device ??

[SIBLEY, Ken R. - ACCOR-NA]

Any chance you are using Sol10 U5?  If so then read this article
from HP about disappearing libraries/drives.

http://h2.www2.hp.com/bizsupport/TechSupport/Document.jsp?lang=en&cc=us&taskId=110&prodSeriesId=463702&prodTypeId=12169&objectID=c01536454

Ken

> -Original Message-
> From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu [mailto:veritas-bu-
> boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of rico78
> Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2011 9:57 AM
> To: VERITAS-BU@MAILMAN.ENG.AUBURN.EDU
> Subject: [Veritas-bu] netbackup 6.5: can't find any media device ??
> 
> Did you install the netbackup sg driver?
> 
> Which drivers are you using?
> 
> Hmm I guess no!  :(
> I'm using the default SCSA installed with Solaris:
> 
> 
> # /usr/sbin/modinfo |grep sg
> 142 f01cb000   1af8  97   1  sysmsg (System message redirection (fan)
> 222 f0a75000   2e70 231   1  sg (SCSA Generic Revision: 3.6)
> 233 f09e2000   29d8  49   1  msgsys (System V message facility)
> 233 f09e2000   29d8  49   1  msgsys (32-bit System V message facilit)
> 238 f0116000   4140 145   1  sgen (SCSI generic driver 1.11)
> #
> 
> 
> So I need to the one that comes with netbackup then?
> 
> Regards,
> 
> +--
> |This was sent by edesam...@opentv.com via Backup Central.
> |Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com.
> +--
> 
> 
> ___
> Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
> http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] netbackup 6.5: can't find any media device ??

[Len Boyle]

Good Morning, 

Did you install the netbackup sg driver?

Which drivers are you using?

len

-Original Message-
From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu 
[mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of rico78
Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2011 9:51 AM
To: VERITAS-BU@MAILMAN.ENG.AUBURN.EDU
Subject: [Veritas-bu] netbackup 6.5: can't find any media device ??

Hi Folks,

I've got a solaris 5.10 server with a HP tape library  (Model MSL2024 1 LTO-4 
Ultrium 1760 SAS Tape Library AK378A) connected to it by SAS.

I'm running Netbackup 6.5 on the solaris server, but from the netbackup java 
console, I CAN'T find the media device attached to the host through the device 
Configuration Wizard.

Did I forget to configure something? Is HP tape libray need to be manually 
added to the netbackup configuration.

When running HP Libray Tape Tool, when I run a hardware scan, the drive is been 
detected; and get the information out of it:

Libraries/Autoloaders:


Processors/Enclosures:

Drives:
   1 HP Ultrium 4-SCSI (Address: 0.1.0[st@1,0-/dev/rmt/0])

===

Main > Drive Information >

--
The following is identity information for the selected device. You can use 
commands to select functionality to perform on this device.

Product ID  : Ultrium 4-SCSI
Drive Technology : LTO
Mech. Serial Number   : HU194
Firmware Rev  : U51W/MSL G3 Series SAS
Target ID: 1
Target LUN : 0
OBDR Capability : Not Supported
WORM Capability: Supported

As I used to work with NB under windows, I'm not quite familiar under solaris 
so any help will be welcomed!

+--
|This was sent by edesam...@opentv.com via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com.
+--


___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu 
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu


___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5.x or 7.0(?) for Windows 2008 R2 64-bit + DFSR.

[Ed Wilts]

On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 11:28 AM,  wrote:

> Seems the DFSR may now be in the Shadow copy Components part.


Yup.  And to make it more interesting, apparently there's no such thing as
an incremental of the Shadow Copy Components - all of the backups are always
fulls.

We're having a bit of fun with one of our DFSR hosts and we're running 7.0.1
on both the server and the client.

Ed Wilts, RHCE, BCFP, BCSD, SCSP, SCSE
ewi...@ewilts.org
 LinkedIn
___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5.x or 7.0(?) for Windows 2008 R2 64-bit + DFSR.

[judy_hinchcliffe]

There was a note that it was still broke on 7.0, suppose to be fixed in 7.0.1.
I just upgraded my dfs server to 7.0.1 and did my first backup last night 
without turning it off.
Seems the DFSR may now be in the Shadow copy Components part.  I have a call 
out to get more info and understanding on how this is working.
Right now my backup is at 800 gb and still running for the SCC's job.


-Original Message-
From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu 
[mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Justin Piszcz
Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2010 11:20 AM
To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5.x or 7.0(?) for Windows 2008 R2 64-bit + 
DFSR.

Hi,

What are people out there doing for backing up Windows 2008 64-bit R2 
hosts with DFSR enabled?

Still using the stop/start dfsr scripts & registry hack , or?

I tried the 'hotfix' for 7.0 it did not work.

Justin.
___
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] Netbackup 6.5 / Exchange 2007.

[WEAVER, Simon (external)]

Is there anything in the Windows "Application" log at the time of the
Backup to give an indication as to "why" it may have failed by chance?
 
Also are you running just 6.5 or any release update pack?
 
Simon



From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
[mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Ulises
Rodriguez
Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 8:37 PM
To: 'VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu'
Subject: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 / Exchange 2007.



Hello All, 

 

I am backing up the full exchange information store and the transaction
logs are not getting cleaned up after a full backup. Has anyone seen
this issue? 

 

Running Win2k3 Netbackup 6.5.

Exchange 2007 Win2k3 64bit.

 

Any ideas?

 

Thank you, 

Ulises R.

 


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, England
___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 Oracle agent using RMAN crosscheckcommand

[Martin, Jonathan]

We tested the RMAN crosscheck command when testing DR replication and
although I thought we were going to need it, we didn't.  If I can
remember correctly, the RMAN database holds some information about the
image the data is on, and the location of that image (MediaID or DSSU
location), however when you go to do a restore, it requests the image,
not the location, and Netbackup is responsible for supplying the correct
source.  To make our DR work, we only have to make two changes.
 
1) Change the client name to the original source client (our DR servers
have different names then Prod) and reboot (if windows)
2) Account for any time difference when issuing the RMAN restore
commands (Our DR site is 3 time zones behind, so we have to add 3 hours
to the restore requests.)
 
Hope that helps.
 
-Jonathan
 


From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
[mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Wheeler,
Gideon
Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 10:15 AM
To: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 Oracle agent using RMAN
crosscheckcommand



Has anyone had experience using  the RMAN crosscheck command to keep the
oracle RMAN catalogue in sync, particularly when duplication is
involved. Its highly probable that the original RMAN entry will point to
an expired image ( although the 2nd copy is still active)

Regards

Gideon

 

___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 installation in Red Hat 6.5

[Jeff Lightner]

First you need to learn to distinguish what you're running from a Linux
standpoint.  Typically you can determine the Distro and version by
typing "cat /etc/issue" and on Fedora/RedHat/CentOS you can type "cat
/etc/redhat-release".   

You also need to run "uname -a" as it will tell you the version of Linux
kernel you are running and included architecture information.

IA64 = Itanium - A special 64 bit chip from Intel - This is NOT the same
as x86_64.
x86_64 = 64 bit x86 compatible chip (Intel or AMD).  
i386 (or i686) = 32 bit x86 compatible chip (Intel or AMD).

You can run i386 and i686 packages on x86_64 but would be restricted to
32 bit mode on such packages.  It isn't unusual to have both i386 and
x86_64 packages on a 64 bit machine.

You can NOT run IA64 on either x86_64 or i386.  It must be run on IA64.

You should advise the vendor to quit sending you crap such as the IA64
package you don't need and send you something designed for the
architecture (x86_64) you're running OR tell you how to install the i386
package if it is the only one available for your architecture.

-Original Message-
From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
[mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of
naymyotun
Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2009 3:48 AM
To: VERITAS-BU@MAILMAN.ENG.AUBURN.EDU
Subject: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 installation in Red Hat 6.5


Thx. I managed to install the required the ICS package now. But when I
try to install the package " NetBackup_6.5_LinuxRedhat2.6.tar.gz"
according to my vendor suggestion, I encounter the following error "
NetBackup server software for the linuxR_x86 platform is not on this
cdrom." . 

Currently the installation server is running on " Linux NBU
2.6.18-92.el5 #1 SMP Tue Apr 29 13:16:15 EDT 2008 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64
GNU/Linux ". I downloaded this package from
https://www4.symantec.com/Vrt/vrtcontroller#  .  I  also download
"NetBackup_6.5_LinuxIA64.tar.gz" and try install but the same error
receive again. 

But  I can't see any package related to X86 for the redhat linux in this
https://www4.symantec.com/Vrt/vrtcontroller#  link to install the NBU
6.5 installation.
But i managed to install this " NetBackup_6.5_LinuxRedhat2.6.tar.gz" on
i386 machine. 
Pls.advise.





James Pattinson wrote:
> It's true, you do need to install this library and it's documented in 
> the release notes. If you have yum configured you can use yum to
install 
> the lib.
> 
> naymyotun wrote:
> 
> > Hi Guru,
> > I m a netbackup beginner. I just received three packages from my
vendor to install the netbackup 6.5 on my redhat 5 development server.
> > ( 1 )NetBackup_6.5_LinuxRedhat2.6.tar.gz 
> > ( 2 )NetBackup_6.5_ICS_LinuxX86.tar.gz
> > ( 3 )NetBackup_6.5_CLIENTS2.tar.gz 
> > 
> > First of all , I install the package 1 and i got the following error
message.
> > 
> > "CPI ERROR V-9-0-0 The 'libstdc++-libc6.2-2.so.3' compatibility
library must
> > be installed before you can install the VRTSpbx package.  You can
install
> > the 'libstdc++-libc6.2-2.so.3' library by installing the 'compat'
RPM, which
> > you can find on the SuSE OS installation media or on the download
section of
> > the SuSE/Novell Web site.
> > The following systems do not have this library installed:
> > localhost
> > installics log files are saved at
/opt/VRTS/install/logs/installics-LBhDYy
> > 
> > 
> > The ICS install for VRTSpbx was unsuccessful.
> > Quitting the NetBackup install.
> > 
> > I tried installing the package 2 using the  different terminal and I
received the same error message.
> > 
> > Task Menu:
> > 
> > I) Install/Upgrade a Product  C) Configure an Installed Product
> > L) License a Product  P) Perform a Pre-Installation Check
> > U) Uninstall a ProductD) View a Product Description
> > Q) Quit   ?) Help
> > 
> > Enter a Task: [I,C,L,P,U,D,Q,?] I
> > 
> > Symantec Infrastructure Core Services Installer 5.0
> > 
> > 1)  Symantec Private Branch Exchange
> > 2)  Symantec Product Authentication Service
> > 3)  Symantec Product Authorization Service
> > b)  Back to previous menu
> > 
> > Select a product to install: [1-3,b,q] 1
> > Enter the system names separated by spaces on which to install PBX:
nay
> > 
> > Initial system check:
> > 
> > Checking PBX installation on localhost not
installed
> > 
> > 
> > Symantec Infrastructure Core Services Installer 5.0
> > 
> > Checking installed rpms on localhost
> > 
> > CPI ERROR V-9-0-0 The 'libstdc++-libc6.2-2.so.3' compatibility
library must
> > be installed before you can install the VRTSpbx package.  You can
install
> > the 'libstdc++-libc6.2-2.so.3' library by installing the 'compat'
RPM, which
> > you can find on the SuSE OS installation media or on the download
section of
> > the SuSE/Novell Web site.
> > The following systems do not have this library installed:
> > localhost
> > installics log files are saved at
/opt/VRTS/install/logs/installics-kxi6WZ
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > If you wa

Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 installation in Red Hat 6.5

[Jeff Lightner]

Why does a bundle intended for RedHat would have comments about Suse?

Anyway what you need is the compat-libstdc++-296 package.  (Note that in
this name the 296 is actually part of the package name rather than the
version - there will be version information after the package name.)
You can install by doing "yum install compat-libstdc++-296".

Also note if you don't already have xinetd installed you should install
it BEFORE you install NetBackup.  The installer is brain dead and
assumes you have inetd if it doesn't find xinetd which is not the case.
If you've already installed NetBackup you should delete it and reinstall
after removing the /etc/inetd.conf file it made.

-Original Message-
From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
[mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of James
Pattinson
Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2009 5:39 AM
To: VERITAS-BU@MAILMAN.ENG.AUBURN.EDU
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 installation in Red Hat 6.5

It's true, you do need to install this library and it's documented in 
the release notes. If you have yum configured you can use yum to install

the lib.

naymyotun wrote:
> Hi Guru,
> I m a netbackup beginner. I just received three packages from my
vendor to install the netbackup 6.5 on my redhat 5 development server.
> ( 1 )NetBackup_6.5_LinuxRedhat2.6.tar.gz 
> ( 2 )NetBackup_6.5_ICS_LinuxX86.tar.gz
> ( 3 )NetBackup_6.5_CLIENTS2.tar.gz 
>
> First of all , I install the package 1 and i got the following error
message.
>
> "CPI ERROR V-9-0-0 The 'libstdc++-libc6.2-2.so.3' compatibility
library must
> be installed before you can install the VRTSpbx package.  You can
install
> the 'libstdc++-libc6.2-2.so.3' library by installing the 'compat' RPM,
which
> you can find on the SuSE OS installation media or on the download
section of
> the SuSE/Novell Web site.
> The following systems do not have this library installed:
> localhost
> installics log files are saved at
/opt/VRTS/install/logs/installics-LBhDYy
>
>
> The ICS install for VRTSpbx was unsuccessful.
> Quitting the NetBackup install.
>
> I tried installing the package 2 using the  different terminal and I
received the same error message.
>
> Task Menu:
>
> I) Install/Upgrade a Product  C) Configure an Installed Product
> L) License a Product  P) Perform a Pre-Installation Check
> U) Uninstall a ProductD) View a Product Description
> Q) Quit   ?) Help
>
> Enter a Task: [I,C,L,P,U,D,Q,?] I
>
>   Symantec Infrastructure Core Services Installer 5.0
>
>  1)  Symantec Private Branch Exchange
>  2)  Symantec Product Authentication Service
>  3)  Symantec Product Authorization Service
>  b)  Back to previous menu
>
> Select a product to install: [1-3,b,q] 1
> Enter the system names separated by spaces on which to install PBX:
nay
>
> Initial system check:
>
> Checking PBX installation on localhost not
installed
>
>
>   Symantec Infrastructure Core Services Installer 5.0
>
> Checking installed rpms on localhost
>
> CPI ERROR V-9-0-0 The 'libstdc++-libc6.2-2.so.3' compatibility library
must
> be installed before you can install the VRTSpbx package.  You can
install
> the 'libstdc++-libc6.2-2.so.3' library by installing the 'compat' RPM,
which
> you can find on the SuSE OS installation media or on the download
section of
> the SuSE/Novell Web site.
> The following systems do not have this library installed:
> localhost
> installics log files are saved at
/opt/VRTS/install/logs/installics-kxi6WZ
>
>  
>
> If you want to install, configure or manage another application, type
Y to continue...
>
> But I checked on the  netbackup 6.5 UNIX installation guide and there
is not step to install this " CPI ERROR V-9-0-0 The
'libstdc++-libc6.2-2.so.3' compatibility library " .   I believe there
is something wrong in my installation. Pls. help to advise.
>
>
+--
> |This was sent by naymyo...@gmail.com via Backup Central.
> |Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com.
>
+--
>
>
> ___
> Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
> http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
>   

___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
 
Please consider our environment before printing this e-mail or attachments.
-

Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 installation in Red Hat 6.5

[James Pattinson]

It's true, you do need to install this library and it's documented in 
the release notes. If you have yum configured you can use yum to install 
the lib.

naymyotun wrote:
> Hi Guru,
> I m a netbackup beginner. I just received three packages from my vendor to 
> install the netbackup 6.5 on my redhat 5 development server.
> ( 1 )NetBackup_6.5_LinuxRedhat2.6.tar.gz 
> ( 2 )NetBackup_6.5_ICS_LinuxX86.tar.gz
> ( 3 )NetBackup_6.5_CLIENTS2.tar.gz 
>
> First of all , I install the package 1 and i got the following error message.
>
> "CPI ERROR V-9-0-0 The 'libstdc++-libc6.2-2.so.3' compatibility library must
> be installed before you can install the VRTSpbx package.  You can install
> the 'libstdc++-libc6.2-2.so.3' library by installing the 'compat' RPM, which
> you can find on the SuSE OS installation media or on the download section of
> the SuSE/Novell Web site.
> The following systems do not have this library installed:
> localhost
> installics log files are saved at /opt/VRTS/install/logs/installics-LBhDYy
>
>
> The ICS install for VRTSpbx was unsuccessful.
> Quitting the NetBackup install.
>
> I tried installing the package 2 using the  different terminal and I received 
> the same error message.
>
> Task Menu:
>
> I) Install/Upgrade a Product  C) Configure an Installed Product
> L) License a Product  P) Perform a Pre-Installation Check
> U) Uninstall a ProductD) View a Product Description
> Q) Quit   ?) Help
>
> Enter a Task: [I,C,L,P,U,D,Q,?] I
>
>   Symantec Infrastructure Core Services Installer 5.0
>
>  1)  Symantec Private Branch Exchange
>  2)  Symantec Product Authentication Service
>  3)  Symantec Product Authorization Service
>  b)  Back to previous menu
>
> Select a product to install: [1-3,b,q] 1
> Enter the system names separated by spaces on which to install PBX: nay
>
> Initial system check:
>
> Checking PBX installation on localhost not 
> installed
>
>
>   Symantec Infrastructure Core Services Installer 5.0
>
> Checking installed rpms on localhost
>
> CPI ERROR V-9-0-0 The 'libstdc++-libc6.2-2.so.3' compatibility library must
> be installed before you can install the VRTSpbx package.  You can install
> the 'libstdc++-libc6.2-2.so.3' library by installing the 'compat' RPM, which
> you can find on the SuSE OS installation media or on the download section of
> the SuSE/Novell Web site.
> The following systems do not have this library installed:
> localhost
> installics log files are saved at /opt/VRTS/install/logs/installics-kxi6WZ
>
>  
>
> If you want to install, configure or manage another application, type Y to 
> continue...
>
> But I checked on the  netbackup 6.5 UNIX installation guide and there is not 
> step to install this " CPI ERROR V-9-0-0 The 'libstdc++-libc6.2-2.so.3' 
> compatibility library " .   I believe there is something wrong in my 
> installation. Pls. help to advise.
>
> +--
> |This was sent by naymyo...@gmail.com via Backup Central.
> |Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com.
> +--
>
>
> ___
> Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
> http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
>   

___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 Catalog backup - Issue???

[Mark Glazerman]

Dennis,

What do you have as your backup selection inside your catalog policy.

We have always used the default backup selection in our catalog policies (1 
Daily full, daytime cumulative every hour, night time cumulative every 3 hours) 
and a quick look at our policy shows we have specified CATALOG_DRIVEN_BACKUP as 
the backup selection.  I can’t find anything that confirms exactly what is 
backed up by this backup selection but we also do our DR testing at Sungard in 
Philly and have successfully restored our catalog multiple times.

I also went into the backup and restore GUI and took a look at some of our 
catalog backups and they all seem to get the list of files you were talking 
about under /usr/openv (db, netbackup, var, volmgr).

Under /volmgr/database I see the following

.devices_ready
globDB
ltidevs
poolDB
robotic_def
ruleDB
volDB

I don't know if it makes any difference but we don't backup up anything to tape 
(all backups go to Data Domain restorers).  The one time we did try a DR 
exercise from tape we couldn't get the catalog restore to work.  That helped 
put together a pretty convincing business case to move to disk based backups 
and we've been 100% successful every time since then !!

Mark Glazerman
Desk: 314-889-8282
Cell: 618-520-3401
 please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to

-Original Message-
From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu 
[mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of 
judy_hinchcli...@administaff.com
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2009 5:41 PM
To: VERITAS-BU@MAILMAN.ENG.AUBURN.EDU
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 Catalog backup - Issue???

I just checked by catalog tape ( I always do fulls)
And I do find /usr/openv/netbackup/db on the tape listing class and
images and other items.

So I checked the catalog config and see in the file list that I specify
the catalog to backup that dir.


My list
Master:/usr/openv/netbackup/db
Master:/usr/openv/volmgr/database
Master:/usr/openv/var
Media:/usr/openv/netbackup/db
Media:/usr/openv/volmgr/database
Media:/usr/openv/var
Master:NETBACKUP_RELEATIONL_DATABASE_FILES

What is in your list?


-Original Message-
From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
[mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Dennis
Peacock
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2009 5:04 PM
To: VERITAS-BU@MAILMAN.ENG.AUBURN.EDU
Subject: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 Catalog backup - Issue???


We are running Solaris 10 boxes, Netbackup 6.5.3.1

1 master server
4 media servers
SL8500 tape library with T10Kb drives

Just got back from a Disaster Recovery Exercise at Sungard in Philly.
What we discovered is: 

Full Catalog backup does NOT backup /usr/openv/db but DOES backup
/usr/openv/netbackup, /usr/openv/var, & /usr/openv/volmgr.
Differential/Incremental Catalog backup DOES backup the following:
/usr/openv/db
/usr/openv/netbackup
/usr/openv/var
/usr/openv/volmgr
 
The difference is the FULL backup "misses" the /usr/openv/db directory
and it's files, while the DIFF/INCR does backup the /usr/openv/db
directory. So what's the big deal?

In a DR Exercise, you normally bring your FULL catalog backup with you
and recover the catalog from that FULL. What it does NOT put back are
the "Media Pools" that are outside the Netbackup default media pools.
This means that once your recovery of the catalog is done? You have
nothing but the standard default media pools and not your production
media pools for your backups and any RMAN backups.

Anybody seen this or know if I'm just off my rocker or is Netbackup
really missing part of the catalog for DR Recovery?

Inquiring minds want to know.

+--
|This was sent by dpe...@acxiom.com via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com.
+--



___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 Catalog backup - Issue???

[Dean]

> I wish there was a way to post a screenshot on this forum.  :)
>

You could just upload the screenshot to something like
http://imageshack.us/and then post the link here.
___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 Catalog backup - Issue???

[judy_hinchcliffe]

I just checked by catalog tape ( I always do fulls)
And I do find /usr/openv/netbackup/db on the tape listing class and
images and other items.

So I checked the catalog config and see in the file list that I specify
the catalog to backup that dir.


My list
Master:/usr/openv/netbackup/db
Master:/usr/openv/volmgr/database
Master:/usr/openv/var
Media:/usr/openv/netbackup/db
Media:/usr/openv/volmgr/database
Media:/usr/openv/var
Master:NETBACKUP_RELEATIONL_DATABASE_FILES

What is in your list?


-Original Message-
From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
[mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Dennis
Peacock
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2009 5:04 PM
To: VERITAS-BU@MAILMAN.ENG.AUBURN.EDU
Subject: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 Catalog backup - Issue???


We are running Solaris 10 boxes, Netbackup 6.5.3.1

1 master server
4 media servers
SL8500 tape library with T10Kb drives

Just got back from a Disaster Recovery Exercise at Sungard in Philly.
What we discovered is: 

Full Catalog backup does NOT backup /usr/openv/db but DOES backup
/usr/openv/netbackup, /usr/openv/var, & /usr/openv/volmgr.
Differential/Incremental Catalog backup DOES backup the following:
/usr/openv/db
/usr/openv/netbackup
/usr/openv/var
/usr/openv/volmgr
 
The difference is the FULL backup "misses" the /usr/openv/db directory
and it's files, while the DIFF/INCR does backup the /usr/openv/db
directory. So what's the big deal?

In a DR Exercise, you normally bring your FULL catalog backup with you
and recover the catalog from that FULL. What it does NOT put back are
the "Media Pools" that are outside the Netbackup default media pools.
This means that once your recovery of the catalog is done? You have
nothing but the standard default media pools and not your production
media pools for your backups and any RMAN backups.

Anybody seen this or know if I'm just off my rocker or is Netbackup
really missing part of the catalog for DR Recovery?

Inquiring minds want to know.

+--
|This was sent by dpe...@acxiom.com via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com.
+--



___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 upgrade qs

[Dean]

You don't NEED to patch up the clients, but obviously it's best if you can.
Sometimes, you just can't. For example, the only we we can backup a couple
of old Solaris 2.6 (yeah, not supported) clients to a 6.5.3 master server is
with the NBU 4.5 client (yeah, also no supported). Our master and media
servers are all 6.5.3, but a large proportion, probably about half, of our
clients are still running 5.1 clients. And yes, we know that if anything
breaks on the 5.1 clients (or 4.5), we probably won't be able to get support
from Symantec. If anything does happen, the first thing we will try is
upgrading the client to the same level as the master, but so far,
everything's working fine.

Cheers
Dean

On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 10:37 PM, Dave Markham wrote:

> Actually no i'm using the same master server name which i thought would
> be best.
>
> What i've done previously when we had to install a new Sol9 OS was to
> create the new OS and build the server on identical hardware with new
> disks amd same machine name, install netbackup and recover the
> catalogues from the main server. This all worked fine.
>
> My main question is actually surrounding patches as i need to work out
> if i need any solaris 8 patches for the CLIENTS. I know my new master
> server will be solaris10 which handles multi threaded applications, but
> i can't see anywhere about client patches.
>
> Cheers
>
> WEAVER, Simon (external) wrote:
> > Dave
> > This is one process I am looking at. I take it, you chose a completely
> > new name for the Master ?
> > Simon
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
> > [mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of
> > tsimerson
> > Sent: Friday, July 10, 2009 2:50 PM
> > To: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
> > Subject: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 upgrade qs
> >
> >
> > One thing to keep in mind that it is critical to go through the steps of
> > running catalog consistency tests.  I had tons of problems with this
> > (100+ GB catalog space).  And never got the catalog into a state that we
> > could actually upgrade our 5.1 MP7 in place.  It would have taken us an
> > estimate 4 - 5 days of downtime to actually complete the upgrade.  The
> > catch was having to go through Symantec support to check and fix any
> > catalog inconsistencies.  That was a tedious process (run the test, send
> > the output, receive a fix file, run the fix file, repeat, repeat,
> > repeat).  Every time I would get to a consistent state, I ran out of my
> > upgrade window.
> >
> > I ended up creating a new environment running NBU 6.5.3 and migrating
> > media servers and clients over.  I'm just now finishing that up after 8
> > weeks of effort.  Should be done by the end of this month.  Oh, and I've
> > been consolidating the long retention period data on the 5.1 environment
> > to tapes that I can then import into the 6.5 environment.
> >
> >
> > Dave Markham wrote:
> >
> >> I'm currently running NBU 5.0 MP7 On Solaris 9 on an E220R
> >>
> >> End goal is to get to NBU 6.5.4 on Solaris 10 on a new T5220.
> >>
> >> Network based clients, mix of Win200, Win2003, Solaris 8
> >>
> >> My upgrade path is going to be as follows. Does anyone see any issues
> >> with this?
> >>
> >> Build Sol10 on new box
> >> Install NBU 5.0GA on new box
> >> Install MP7 for 5.0 on new box (solaris 10 aware) Backup catalogues on
> >>
> >
> >
> >> old box Transfer and recover catalogues on new box.
> >> Install new box and connect to existing tape library etc
> >> --- Should now having running NBU 5.0 MP7 on new T5220 with Sol10 ---
> >> Upgrade to NBU 6.5 Install 6.5.4 patch.  ( i assume 6.5.4 is not
> >> released as a full version. I can't see to find that info out ).
> >>
> >> The questions i have is :-
> >>
> >> 1. From reading the release guide and all the cross references i see
> >> there are patches required for Solaris 8 for NBU6.5. I couldn't see
> >> any patches needed for Solaris 10. My question is are these patches
> >> only relevant for the server software? I.E I dont need to patch all my
> >>
> >
> >
> >> clients with the Sol8 OS patches in the NBU 6.5 release guide?
> >>
> >> 2. Is it possible to restore catalogues taken from NBU 5 onto a new
> >> system with NBU 6.5.4 ? I know the cats are different, but was just
> >> wondering if i could shorten my upgrade path by using NBU 5 catalogue
> >> tapes and restoring them onto a newly installed 6.5.4 version.
> >>
> >> Cheers
> >> ___
> >> Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu
> >> http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
> >>
> >
> >
> > +--
> > |This was sent by t...@tjsimerson.org via Backup Central.
> > |Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com.
> > +--
> >
> >
> > ___
> >

Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 upgrade qs

[Dave Markham]

Actually no i'm using the same master server name which i thought would 
be best.

What i've done previously when we had to install a new Sol9 OS was to 
create the new OS and build the server on identical hardware with new 
disks amd same machine name, install netbackup and recover the 
catalogues from the main server. This all worked fine.

My main question is actually surrounding patches as i need to work out 
if i need any solaris 8 patches for the CLIENTS. I know my new master 
server will be solaris10 which handles multi threaded applications, but 
i can't see anywhere about client patches.

Cheers

WEAVER, Simon (external) wrote:
> Dave
> This is one process I am looking at. I take it, you chose a completely
> new name for the Master ?
> Simon 
>
> -Original Message-
> From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
> [mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of
> tsimerson
> Sent: Friday, July 10, 2009 2:50 PM
> To: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
> Subject: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 upgrade qs
>
>
> One thing to keep in mind that it is critical to go through the steps of
> running catalog consistency tests.  I had tons of problems with this
> (100+ GB catalog space).  And never got the catalog into a state that we
> could actually upgrade our 5.1 MP7 in place.  It would have taken us an
> estimate 4 - 5 days of downtime to actually complete the upgrade.  The
> catch was having to go through Symantec support to check and fix any
> catalog inconsistencies.  That was a tedious process (run the test, send
> the output, receive a fix file, run the fix file, repeat, repeat,
> repeat).  Every time I would get to a consistent state, I ran out of my
> upgrade window.
>
> I ended up creating a new environment running NBU 6.5.3 and migrating
> media servers and clients over.  I'm just now finishing that up after 8
> weeks of effort.  Should be done by the end of this month.  Oh, and I've
> been consolidating the long retention period data on the 5.1 environment
> to tapes that I can then import into the 6.5 environment.
>
>
> Dave Markham wrote:
>   
>> I'm currently running NBU 5.0 MP7 On Solaris 9 on an E220R
>>
>> End goal is to get to NBU 6.5.4 on Solaris 10 on a new T5220.
>>
>> Network based clients, mix of Win200, Win2003, Solaris 8
>>
>> My upgrade path is going to be as follows. Does anyone see any issues 
>> with this?
>>
>> Build Sol10 on new box
>> Install NBU 5.0GA on new box
>> Install MP7 for 5.0 on new box (solaris 10 aware) Backup catalogues on
>> 
>
>   
>> old box Transfer and recover catalogues on new box.
>> Install new box and connect to existing tape library etc
>> --- Should now having running NBU 5.0 MP7 on new T5220 with Sol10 --- 
>> Upgrade to NBU 6.5 Install 6.5.4 patch.  ( i assume 6.5.4 is not 
>> released as a full version. I can't see to find that info out ).
>>
>> The questions i have is :-
>>
>> 1. From reading the release guide and all the cross references i see 
>> there are patches required for Solaris 8 for NBU6.5. I couldn't see 
>> any patches needed for Solaris 10. My question is are these patches 
>> only relevant for the server software? I.E I dont need to patch all my
>> 
>
>   
>> clients with the Sol8 OS patches in the NBU 6.5 release guide?
>>
>> 2. Is it possible to restore catalogues taken from NBU 5 onto a new 
>> system with NBU 6.5.4 ? I know the cats are different, but was just 
>> wondering if i could shorten my upgrade path by using NBU 5 catalogue 
>> tapes and restoring them onto a newly installed 6.5.4 version.
>>
>> Cheers
>> ___
>> Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu 
>> http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
>> 
>
>
> +--
> |This was sent by t...@tjsimerson.org via Backup Central.
> |Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com.
> +--
>
>
> ___
> Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
> http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
>
> 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, England
> ___
> Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
> h

Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 upgrade qs

[WEAVER, Simon (external)]

Sounds like you went down the same route I am going (new Server, new
environment, starting afresh).

Simon 

-Original Message-
From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
[mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of
tsimerson
Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2009 3:28 PM
To: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 upgrade qs


Simon,

Yes, I did choose a completely new name for the master server.

Tom

+--
|This was sent by t...@tjsimerson.org via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com.
+--


___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

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, England
___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 upgrade qs

[WEAVER, Simon (external)]

Dave
This is one process I am looking at. I take it, you chose a completely
new name for the Master ?
Simon 

-Original Message-
From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
[mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of
tsimerson
Sent: Friday, July 10, 2009 2:50 PM
To: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 upgrade qs


One thing to keep in mind that it is critical to go through the steps of
running catalog consistency tests.  I had tons of problems with this
(100+ GB catalog space).  And never got the catalog into a state that we
could actually upgrade our 5.1 MP7 in place.  It would have taken us an
estimate 4 - 5 days of downtime to actually complete the upgrade.  The
catch was having to go through Symantec support to check and fix any
catalog inconsistencies.  That was a tedious process (run the test, send
the output, receive a fix file, run the fix file, repeat, repeat,
repeat).  Every time I would get to a consistent state, I ran out of my
upgrade window.

I ended up creating a new environment running NBU 6.5.3 and migrating
media servers and clients over.  I'm just now finishing that up after 8
weeks of effort.  Should be done by the end of this month.  Oh, and I've
been consolidating the long retention period data on the 5.1 environment
to tapes that I can then import into the 6.5 environment.


Dave Markham wrote:
> I'm currently running NBU 5.0 MP7 On Solaris 9 on an E220R
> 
> End goal is to get to NBU 6.5.4 on Solaris 10 on a new T5220.
> 
> Network based clients, mix of Win200, Win2003, Solaris 8
> 
> My upgrade path is going to be as follows. Does anyone see any issues 
> with this?
> 
> Build Sol10 on new box
> Install NBU 5.0GA on new box
> Install MP7 for 5.0 on new box (solaris 10 aware) Backup catalogues on

> old box Transfer and recover catalogues on new box.
> Install new box and connect to existing tape library etc
> --- Should now having running NBU 5.0 MP7 on new T5220 with Sol10 --- 
> Upgrade to NBU 6.5 Install 6.5.4 patch.  ( i assume 6.5.4 is not 
> released as a full version. I can't see to find that info out ).
> 
> The questions i have is :-
> 
> 1. From reading the release guide and all the cross references i see 
> there are patches required for Solaris 8 for NBU6.5. I couldn't see 
> any patches needed for Solaris 10. My question is are these patches 
> only relevant for the server software? I.E I dont need to patch all my

> clients with the Sol8 OS patches in the NBU 6.5 release guide?
> 
> 2. Is it possible to restore catalogues taken from NBU 5 onto a new 
> system with NBU 6.5.4 ? I know the cats are different, but was just 
> wondering if i could shorten my upgrade path by using NBU 5 catalogue 
> tapes and restoring them onto a newly installed 6.5.4 version.
> 
> Cheers
> ___
> Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu < at > mailman.eng.auburn.edu 
> http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu


+--
|This was sent by t...@tjsimerson.org via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com.
+--


___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

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, England
___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 upgrade q's

[Dave Markham]

Thanks guys. Pretty much what i thought of doing.

I just need to clarify after upgrade to 6.5.4 if i need sol8 patches.

I then need to work out all the steps to install MSEO.  Knightmare.

Cheers


rusty.ma...@sungard.com wrote:
>
> Dave,
>
> I would recommend installing your new server at 5.0MP7 and switching 
> over to it. Our upgrade path for new hardware has been to install NBU 
> on the new server, then copy a tarball of /usr/openv over and untar it 
> on the new server. Then swap IPs, hostnames, cabling, etc. and you're 
> done. It takes about a day, but this seems the quickest and easiest 
> method to ensure the environment has all the config files, catalog, 
> etc., in place.
>
> Once that's done, we usually run on the new hardware at the old 
> version for a few days or a week to ensure everything is ok and then 
> move forward with the 6.5 upgrade.
>
> *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/_
> 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.
>
>
> *Dave Markham *
> Sent by: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
>
> 07/08/2009 04:59 AM
> Please respond to
> dave.mark...@fjserv.net
>
>
>   
> To
>   "veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu" 
> cc
>   
> Subject
>   [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 upgrade q's
>
>
>
>   
>
>
>
>
>
> I'm currently running NBU 5.0 MP7 On Solaris 9 on an E220R
>
> End goal is to get to NBU 6.5.4 on Solaris 10 on a new T5220.
>
> Network based clients, mix of Win200, Win2003, Solaris 8
>
> My upgrade path is going to be as follows. Does anyone see any issues
> with this?
>
> Build Sol10 on new box
> Install NBU 5.0GA on new box
> Install MP7 for 5.0 on new box (solaris 10 aware)
> Backup catalogues on old box
> Transfer and recover catalogues on new box.
> Install new box and connect to existing tape library etc
> --- Should now having running NBU 5.0 MP7 on new T5220 with Sol10 ---
> Upgrade to NBU 6.5
> Install 6.5.4 patch.  ( i assume 6.5.4 is not released as a full
> version. I can't see to find that info out ).
>
> The questions i have is :-
>
> 1. From reading the release guide and all the cross references i see
> there are patches required for Solaris 8 for NBU6.5. I couldn't see any
> patches needed for Solaris 10. My question is are these patches only
> relevant for the server software? I.E I dont need to patch all my
> clients with the Sol8 OS patches in the NBU 6.5 release guide?
>
> 2. Is it possible to restore catalogues taken from NBU 5 onto a new
> system with NBU 6.5.4 ? I know the cats are different, but was just
> wondering if i could shorten my upgrade path by using NBU 5 catalogue
> tapes and restoring them onto a newly installed 6.5.4 version.
>
> Cheers
> ___
> 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] Netbackup 6.5 upgrade q's

[Rusty.Major]

Dave,

I would recommend installing your new server at 5.0MP7 and switching over 
to it. Our upgrade path for new hardware has been to install NBU on the 
new server, then copy a tarball of /usr/openv over and untar it on the new 
server. Then swap IPs, hostnames, cabling, etc. and you're done. It takes 
about a day, but this seems the quickest and easiest method to ensure the 
environment has all the config files, catalog, etc., in place.

Once that's done, we usually run on the new hardware at the old version 
for a few days or a week to ensure everything is ok and then move forward 
with the 6.5 upgrade.

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/ 
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. 



Dave Markham  
Sent by: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
07/08/2009 04:59 AM
Please respond to
dave.mark...@fjserv.net


To
"veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu" 
cc

Subject
[Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 upgrade q's






I'm currently running NBU 5.0 MP7 On Solaris 9 on an E220R

End goal is to get to NBU 6.5.4 on Solaris 10 on a new T5220.

Network based clients, mix of Win200, Win2003, Solaris 8

My upgrade path is going to be as follows. Does anyone see any issues 
with this?

Build Sol10 on new box
Install NBU 5.0GA on new box
Install MP7 for 5.0 on new box (solaris 10 aware)
Backup catalogues on old box
Transfer and recover catalogues on new box.
Install new box and connect to existing tape library etc
--- Should now having running NBU 5.0 MP7 on new T5220 with Sol10 ---
Upgrade to NBU 6.5
Install 6.5.4 patch.  ( i assume 6.5.4 is not released as a full 
version. I can't see to find that info out ).

The questions i have is :-

1. From reading the release guide and all the cross references i see 
there are patches required for Solaris 8 for NBU6.5. I couldn't see any 
patches needed for Solaris 10. My question is are these patches only 
relevant for the server software? I.E I dont need to patch all my 
clients with the Sol8 OS patches in the NBU 6.5 release guide?

2. Is it possible to restore catalogues taken from NBU 5 onto a new 
system with NBU 6.5.4 ? I know the cats are different, but was just 
wondering if i could shorten my upgrade path by using NBU 5 catalogue 
tapes and restoring them onto a newly installed 6.5.4 version.

Cheers
___
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] Netbackup 6.5 DSSU fragmentation

[Mellor, Adam A.]

I have come across issues with our disk staging units as well, but it is not 
fragmentation...

out of two media servers, only one presents the symptom of de-staging slowing 
down.

System A - Master Server, Solaris 10 Sparc, 2x DSU's (each 4x 4+1 FC attached 
SATA disks) formatted VXVM/VXFS.

System B - Media Server to System A, Solaris 10 Sparc, 1x DSU (4x 4+1 FC 
attached SATA disks) formatted ZFS.

System B gives us consistent performance, month in month out.

System A works great, better than System A (by about 50MB/s). However, there is 
a noticeable decrease in de-staging performance (probably staging performance 
as well, but who is up at 11pm to see that) after about 2 weeks of system 
uptime. and after about 4 weeks the issue is blatantly staring us in the face, 
we see about only 50MB/s of de-staging performance.

The last time this issue hit us I did some tests, dd from DSU to tape = Slow, 
dd from DSU to null = Slow, dd from zero to DSU = Slow, DD from Zero to tape = 
FAST :-). ok, I'm happy it is not tape subsystem, I thought for a moment I have 
a ZFS mirror of 2x 2.5" SAS disks on System A, copied a Large image from DSU to 
the SAS disk. I performed first the dd test of that image to null from the DSU, 
still slow. OK, I performed the dd test from SAS to null = Fast. Wait, What a 
single 2.5 SAS disk is faster that 16x SATA disks ? No way.
I knew through previous experiences that a reboot clears (temporarily) the 
symptom. and on this most recent experience I rebooted, and as soon as it 
returned, dd from the DSU to null = Blazingly Fast.

I will be replacing the VXFS DSU's with ZFS in the future.

Regards

Adam.




From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu 
[mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Ed Wilts
Sent: Thursday, 7 May 2009 12:38 AM
To: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 DSSU fragmentation

It's not just a fragmentation issue - a defrag'ed file system may also give you 
poor destage performance.

A bunch of people have reported this issue but so far nobody has found the 
smoking gun.  It's an issue on multiple platforms as well.

   .../Ed

On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 4:10 AM, owiking 
mailto:netbackup-fo...@backupcentral.com>> 
wrote:

Im having problems with my diskstage getting to fragmented and thus getting 
very slow performance when duplicating to tape. Running defrag isnt an option 
since the files are reaplced fequently and the defrag job will take to long 
time to run.
>From what Ive seen and read, this is a major problem for alot os users of 
>Netbackup.

Is there a way to force Netbackup to preallocate space on the diskstage for 
each backupjob, instead as it is now that they are all written in fragments all 
over the disk?

Ive read some about the differences with Basic and Advanced diskstages in 
Netbackup, Im running Basic atm, but havent found any information that Advanced 
could preallocate space?

My diskstage is 5.5tb large, is it better to make to divide it to 2-3 
partitions to avoid fragmentation?


.../Ed

Ed Wilts, RHCE, BCFP, BCSD, SCSP, SCSE
ewi...@ewilts.org<mailto:ewi...@ewilts.org>

NOTICE: This email and any attachments are confidential. 
They may contain legally privileged information or 
copyright material. You must not read, copy, use or 
disclose them without authorisation. If you are not an 
intended recipient, please contact us at once by return 
email and then delete both messages and all attachments.
___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 DSSU fragmentation

[Ed Wilts]

It's not just a fragmentation issue - a defrag'ed file system may also give
you poor destage performance.

A bunch of people have reported this issue but so far nobody has found the
smoking gun.  It's an issue on multiple platforms as well.

   .../Ed

On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 4:10 AM, owiking
wrote:

>
> Im having problems with my diskstage getting to fragmented and thus getting
> very slow performance when duplicating to tape. Running defrag isnt an
> option since the files are reaplced fequently and the defrag job will take
> to long time to run.
> From what Ive seen and read, this is a major problem for alot os users of
> Netbackup.
>
> Is there a way to force Netbackup to preallocate space on the diskstage for
> each backupjob, instead as it is now that they are all written in fragments
> all over the disk?
>
> Ive read some about the differences with Basic and Advanced diskstages in
> Netbackup, Im running Basic atm, but havent found any information that
> Advanced could preallocate space?
>
> My diskstage is 5.5tb large, is it better to make to divide it to 2-3
> partitions to avoid fragmentation?
>
>
.../Ed

Ed Wilts, RHCE, BCFP, BCSD, SCSP, SCSE
ewi...@ewilts.org
___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

[Rosenkoetter, Gabriel]

Um, and install that patch soon, at least on your masters. Because any policies 
that span 02:00 tomorrow morning (presuming you've got your clocks set to a 
time zone that follows DST) will continuously requeue after successful backups 
if you're still at 6.5.3 or below.


--
gabriel rosenkoetter
Radian Group Inc, Senior Systems Engineer
gabriel.rosenkoet...@radian.biz, 215 231 1556 


-Original Message-
From: Savage, Catherine [mailto:catherine.sav...@uscg.mil] 
Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 2:37 PM
To: patrick.swee...@axcelis.com; Steve Fogarty
Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

Thanks for the quick responses. Because those are production boxes, we can only 
reboot them during the planned system maintenance weekend.

--
Cathy Savage
Backup Operations Team
--

-Original Message-
From: patrick.swee...@axcelis.com [mailto:patrick.swee...@axcelis.com] 
Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 2:32 PM
To: Steve Fogarty; Savage, Catherine
Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

Of course, if the reason you can only reboot at certain times is because of 
running backups , vaults, or other NetBackup activity, then you are still stuck 
in that window, since you will be bringing NetBackup down.

 

Patrick Sweeney

 (978) 787-4553

 patrick.swee...@axcelis.com

 I.T. Systems/Networks

 

For issues requiring immediate attention please contact the Solution Center

IT Solution Center

 (978) 787-

beverly.helpd...@axcelis.com

Axcelis Technologies

 

Have you searched here <http://inside.axcelis.com/>  and here 
<http://www.google.com/> ?

 

From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu 
[mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Steve Fogarty
Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 2:29 PM
To: Savage, Catherine
Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

 

No reboot required.

Stop NBU; apply the Hot Fix; start NBU.

Steve




On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 3:19 PM, Savage, Catherine  
wrote:

I'm new to this and hope you all can help. We're planning the install of this 
patch on our HP-UX media servers and would like to know if a reboot is required 
once this patch is installed. I've read the release notes and installation 
instructions but didn't see anything regarding a reboot.

As we can only perform reboots during certain times, the answer would dictate 
when we can install the patch. Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks,
Cathy Savage

___
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] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

[Savage, Catherine]

Thanks for the quick responses. Because those are production boxes, we can only 
reboot them during the planned system maintenance weekend.

--
Cathy Savage
Backup Operations Team
--

-Original Message-
From: patrick.swee...@axcelis.com [mailto:patrick.swee...@axcelis.com] 
Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 2:32 PM
To: Steve Fogarty; Savage, Catherine
Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

Of course, if the reason you can only reboot at certain times is because of 
running backups , vaults, or other NetBackup activity, then you are still stuck 
in that window, since you will be bringing NetBackup down.

 

Patrick Sweeney

 (978) 787-4553

 patrick.swee...@axcelis.com

 I.T. Systems/Networks

 

For issues requiring immediate attention please contact the Solution Center

IT Solution Center

 (978) 787-

beverly.helpd...@axcelis.com

Axcelis Technologies

 

Have you searched here <http://inside.axcelis.com/>  and here 
<http://www.google.com/> ?

 

From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu 
[mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Steve Fogarty
Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 2:29 PM
To: Savage, Catherine
Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

 

No reboot required.

Stop NBU; apply the Hot Fix; start NBU.

Steve




On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 3:19 PM, Savage, Catherine  
wrote:

I'm new to this and hope you all can help. We're planning the install of this 
patch on our HP-UX media servers and would like to know if a reboot is required 
once this patch is installed. I've read the release notes and installation 
instructions but didn't see anything regarding a reboot.

As we can only perform reboots during certain times, the answer would dictate 
when we can install the patch. Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks,
Cathy Savage

___
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] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

[Sweeney, Patrick]

Of course, if the reason you can only reboot at certain times is because of 
running backups , vaults, or other NetBackup activity, then you are still stuck 
in that window, since you will be bringing NetBackup down.

Patrick Sweeney
 (978) 787-4553
 patrick.swee...@axcelis.com
 I.T. Systems/Networks

For issues requiring immediate attention please contact the Solution Center
IT Solution Center
 (978) 787-
beverly.helpd...@axcelis.com
Axcelis Technologies

Have you searched here<http://inside.axcelis.com/> and 
here<http://www.google.com/>?

From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu 
[mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Steve Fogarty
Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 2:29 PM
To: Savage, Catherine
Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

No reboot required.

Stop NBU; apply the Hot Fix; start NBU.

Steve


On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 3:19 PM, Savage, Catherine 
mailto:catherine.sav...@uscg.mil>> wrote:
I'm new to this and hope you all can help. We're planning the install of this 
patch on our HP-UX media servers and would like to know if a reboot is required 
once this patch is installed. I've read the release notes and installation 
instructions but didn't see anything regarding a reboot.

As we can only perform reboots during certain times, the answer would dictate 
when we can install the patch. Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks,
Cathy Savage

___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  
Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu<mailto: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] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

[Steve Fogarty]

No reboot required.

Stop NBU; apply the Hot Fix; start NBU.

Steve



On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 3:19 PM, Savage, Catherine  wrote:

> I'm new to this and hope you all can help. We're planning the install of
> this patch on our HP-UX media servers and would like to know if a reboot is
> required once this patch is installed. I've read the release notes and
> installation instructions but didn't see anything regarding a reboot.
>
> As we can only perform reboots during certain times, the answer would
> dictate when we can install the patch. Any help would be appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
> Cathy Savage
>
> ___
> 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] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

[Rosenkoetter, Gabriel]

[I exchanged a few out-of-band emails with John about this, and anticipate that 
he'll post when he's done with his testing, but he suspects a different part of 
his environment than the 6.5.3.1 update at this point.]

For what it's worth, not that I tested every corner case, but I just backed up 
17 RHEL clients through my test environment at 6.5.3, saw ~ 40 MB/s aggregate 
throughput (to a disk STU), dropped 6.5.3.1 on the master, and reran the test 
with the same results. (I'm not pushing the client update just now because 
those are actually clients from a production environment.)

So if others were, as I was, alarmed by John's report and back-pedaled on 
updating, you're probably safe to (do your own testing! and then) go ahead and 
upgrade.

--
gabriel rosenkoetter
Radian Group Inc, Senior Systems Engineer
gabriel.rosenkoet...@radian.biz, 215 231 1556





From: Rosenkoetter, Gabriel
Sent: Monday, February 23, 2009 12:55 PM
To: 'Michitsch, John'
Cc: 'VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu'
Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

Wow.

Can you get some solid metrics on the speed drop?

Is it only Exchange clients that are affected?

Are these clients, SAN clients, SAN media servers, etc?

Have you opened a case with Symantec over the issue yet?

(Yes: I'd recommend updating the client software. As I believe I mentioned on 
list, the security vulnerability, part of what 6.5.3.1 corrects, affects all 
members of your NetBackup system, including clients.)


--
gabriel rosenkoetter
Radian Group Inc, Senior Systems Engineer
gabriel.rosenkoet...@radian.biz, 215 231 1556





From: Michitsch, John [mailto:jmich...@gannett.com]
Sent: Saturday, February 21, 2009 10:04 AM
To:
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

We upgraded out master and two media servers to 6.5.3.1 (in order to backup a 
standby Exchange CCR node and Windows 2008) this week and our full backups this 
weekend are running incredibly slow, about 1/3 the normal speed.  The client 
agents have not been upgraded, they are at v. 6.5.1.  Do you think upgrading 
the agent will fix the speed issue, or am I going to need to open a support 
case?

Thoughts?

Thanks.

From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu 
[mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Ed Wilts
Sent: 20 February, 2009 10:08 AM
To: Preston, Doug
Cc: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 8:06 AM, Preston, Doug 
mailto:dpres...@landam.com>> wrote:

 There are a lot of your customers that would rather have a 32bit install 
instead of having to install all new machines twice.

3 times.  6.5 base, 6.5.3 patch kit, then 6.5.3.1 security patch.  Without 
LiveUpdate, I can't see any way to shrink this to less than 3 separate installs.

   .../Ed
Ed Wilts, RHCE, BCFP, BCSD, SCSP, SCSE
ewi...@ewilts.org<mailto:ewi...@ewilts.org>
___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

[Rosenkoetter, Gabriel]

Wow.

Can you get some solid metrics on the speed drop?

Is it only Exchange clients that are affected?

Are these clients, SAN clients, SAN media servers, etc?

Have you opened a case with Symantec over the issue yet?

(Yes: I'd recommend updating the client software. As I believe I mentioned on 
list, the security vulnerability, part of what 6.5.3.1 corrects, affects all 
members of your NetBackup system, including clients.)


--
gabriel rosenkoetter
Radian Group Inc, Senior Systems Engineer
gabriel.rosenkoet...@radian.biz, 215 231 1556





From: Michitsch, John [mailto:jmich...@gannett.com]
Sent: Saturday, February 21, 2009 10:04 AM
To:
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

We upgraded out master and two media servers to 6.5.3.1 (in order to backup a 
standby Exchange CCR node and Windows 2008) this week and our full backups this 
weekend are running incredibly slow, about 1/3 the normal speed.  The client 
agents have not been upgraded, they are at v. 6.5.1.  Do you think upgrading 
the agent will fix the speed issue, or am I going to need to open a support 
case?

Thoughts?

Thanks.

From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu 
[mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Ed Wilts
Sent: 20 February, 2009 10:08 AM
To: Preston, Doug
Cc: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 8:06 AM, Preston, Doug 
mailto:dpres...@landam.com>> wrote:

 There are a lot of your customers that would rather have a 32bit install 
instead of having to install all new machines twice.

3 times.  6.5 base, 6.5.3 patch kit, then 6.5.3.1 security patch.  Without 
LiveUpdate, I can't see any way to shrink this to less than 3 separate installs.

   .../Ed
Ed Wilts, RHCE, BCFP, BCSD, SCSP, SCSE
ewi...@ewilts.org<mailto:ewi...@ewilts.org>
___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

[Michitsch, John]

Correct, but we are not doing the Exchange or 2008 piece yet, just OS level 
backups.

From: judy_hinchcli...@administaff.com [mailto:judy_hinchcli...@administaff.com]
Sent: 21 February, 2009 10:49 AM
To: Michitsch, John; VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

I thought you need 6.5.3 to do exchange 2008 backups That means the client 
needs to be at least at 6.5.3.


From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu 
[mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Michitsch, John
Sent: Saturday, February 21, 2009 9:04 AM
To: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

We upgraded out master and two media servers to 6.5.3.1 (in order to backup a 
standby Exchange CCR node and Windows 2008) this week and our full backups this 
weekend are running incredibly slow, about 1/3 the normal speed.  The client 
agents have not been upgraded, they are at v. 6.5.1.  Do you think upgrading 
the agent will fix the speed issue, or am I going to need to open a support 
case?

Thoughts?

Thanks.

From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu 
[mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Ed Wilts
Sent: 20 February, 2009 10:08 AM
To: Preston, Doug
Cc: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 8:06 AM, Preston, Doug 
mailto:dpres...@landam.com>> wrote:

 There are a lot of your customers that would rather have a 32bit install 
instead of having to install all new machines twice.

3 times.  6.5 base, 6.5.3 patch kit, then 6.5.3.1 security patch.  Without 
LiveUpdate, I can't see any way to shrink this to less than 3 separate installs.

   .../Ed
Ed Wilts, RHCE, BCFP, BCSD, SCSP, SCSE
ewi...@ewilts.org<mailto:ewi...@ewilts.org>
___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

[judy_hinchcliffe]

I thought you need 6.5.3 to do exchange 2008 backups That means the
client needs to be at least at 6.5.3.

 



From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
[mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of
Michitsch, John
Sent: Saturday, February 21, 2009 9:04 AM
To: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1
(6.5.3.1)

 

We upgraded out master and two media servers to 6.5.3.1 (in order to
backup a standby Exchange CCR node and Windows 2008) this week and our
full backups this weekend are running incredibly slow, about 1/3 the
normal speed.  The client agents have not been upgraded, they are at v.
6.5.1.  Do you think upgrading the agent will fix the speed issue, or am
I going to need to open a support case?

 

Thoughts?

 

Thanks.

 

From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
[mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Ed Wilts
Sent: 20 February, 2009 10:08 AM
To: Preston, Doug
Cc: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1
(6.5.3.1)

 

On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 8:06 AM, Preston, Doug 
wrote:

 There are a lot of your customers that would rather have a 32bit
install instead of having to install all new machines twice. 


3 times.  6.5 base, 6.5.3 patch kit, then 6.5.3.1 security patch.
Without LiveUpdate, I can't see any way to shrink this to less than 3
separate installs.

   .../Ed 

Ed Wilts, RHCE, BCFP, BCSD, SCSP, SCSE 
ewi...@ewilts.org

___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

[Michitsch, John]

We upgraded out master and two media servers to 6.5.3.1 (in order to backup a 
standby Exchange CCR node and Windows 2008) this week and our full backups this 
weekend are running incredibly slow, about 1/3 the normal speed.  The client 
agents have not been upgraded, they are at v. 6.5.1.  Do you think upgrading 
the agent will fix the speed issue, or am I going to need to open a support 
case?

Thoughts?

Thanks.

From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu 
[mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Ed Wilts
Sent: 20 February, 2009 10:08 AM
To: Preston, Doug
Cc: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 8:06 AM, Preston, Doug 
mailto:dpres...@landam.com>> wrote:

 There are a lot of your customers that would rather have a 32bit install 
instead of having to install all new machines twice.

3 times.  6.5 base, 6.5.3 patch kit, then 6.5.3.1 security patch.  Without 
LiveUpdate, I can't see any way to shrink this to less than 3 separate installs.

   .../Ed
Ed Wilts, RHCE, BCFP, BCSD, SCSP, SCSE
ewi...@ewilts.org<mailto:ewi...@ewilts.org>
___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

[Rosenkoetter, Gabriel]

Given that the security vulnerability part affects vnetd, yes, you need to 
patch all clients as well as servers.


--
gabriel rosenkoetter
Radian Group Inc, Senior Systems Engineer
gabriel.rosenkoet...@radian.biz, 215 231 1556


-Original Message-
From: X_S [mailto:netbackup-fo...@backupcentral.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2009 3:18 PM
To: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)


I'm sorry, I know that we can install the hotfix on the clients as long as the 
master and media has it.  I wanted to know if the vulnerability exists on the 
clients as well and if the hotfix Should be installed on them.  i can install 
the hotfix on a dozen servers quickly but installing it on over 1000 clients is 
a headache.

+--
|This was sent by xsp...@yahoo.com via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com.
+--





___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

[Preston, Doug]

Wait till 6.5.4 then it will only be 2

 

Doug Preston

 

From: Ed Wilts [mailto:ewi...@ewilts.org] 
Sent: Friday, February 20, 2009 7:08 AM
To: Preston, Doug
Cc: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1
(6.5.3.1)

 

On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 8:06 AM, Preston, Doug 
wrote:

 There are a lot of your customers that would rather have a 32bit
install instead of having to install all new machines twice. 


3 times.  6.5 base, 6.5.3 patch kit, then 6.5.3.1 security patch.
Without LiveUpdate, I can't see any way to shrink this to less than 3
separate installs.

   .../Ed 

Ed Wilts, RHCE, BCFP, BCSD, SCSP, SCSE 
ewi...@ewilts.org

___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

[Ed Wilts]

On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 8:06 AM, Preston, Doug  wrote:

>   There are a lot of your customers that would rather have a 32bit install
> instead of having to install all new machines twice.
>

3 times.  6.5 base, 6.5.3 patch kit, then 6.5.3.1 security patch.  Without
LiveUpdate, I can't see any way to shrink this to less than 3 separate
installs.

   .../Ed

Ed Wilts, RHCE, BCFP, BCSD, SCSP, SCSE
ewi...@ewilts.org
___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

[Preston, Doug]

A DVD ISO for 32bit would be nice too,  I know you have a patched binary
set there,  how hard would it be to create an ISO?  There are a lot of
your customers that would rather have a 32bit install instead of having
to install all new machines twice. 

 

Doug Preston

 

From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
[mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Bill
Coleman
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2009 12:23 PM
To: Len Boyle; Rosenkoetter, Gabriel; VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1
(6.5.3.1)

 

For 6.5.4 we are just releasing a cdrom for Windows x64 due to NetBackup
getting Windows 2008 logo certification.  We are also releasing a patch
container for x64 Windows as well.

 

Other clients will be patch containers and LiveUpdate.  

 

From: Len Boyle [mailto:len.bo...@sas.com] 
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2009 10:58 AM
To: Bill Coleman; Rosenkoetter, Gabriel;
VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1
(6.5.3.1)

 

Bill, will 6.5.4 be a re-master for the windows client? 

 

Thanks len

 

 

 

From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
[mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Bill
Coleman
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2009 11:35 AM
To: Rosenkoetter, Gabriel; VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1
(6.5.3.1)

 

Correct all these 6.5.3.1 corrections are in 6.4.  In fact anyone
getting the 6.5.4 beta next week will have them.  We have processes that
assure this with audits.

 

From: Rosenkoetter, Gabriel [mailto:gabriel.rosenkoet...@radian.biz] 
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2009 10:31 AM
To: Bill Coleman; VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1
(6.5.3.1)

 

Bill, I trust that this security fix will be rolled into the 6.5.4
release, correct?

--
gabriel rosenkoetter
Radian Group Inc, Senior Systems Engineer
gabriel.rosenkoet...@radian.biz, 215 231 1556

 

 



From: Bill Coleman [mailto:bill_cole...@symantec.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2009 6:25 PM
To: judy_hinchcli...@administaff.com; VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1
(6.5.3.1)

NetBackup 6.5.3.1 Hotfix is not cumulative unless the LiveUpdate package
is used.  If you use the patch containers instead of LU, you must have
6.5.3 installed as a base.

 

6.5.3.1 is a small patch release that will address two issues with the
scheduler.  NetBackup 6.5.3.1 is the first "triple-dot" hot-fix release
produced by NetBackup, and it delivers a vulnerability fix, a scheduler
correction for windows that span midnight, and corrective fixes to the
scheduler when spring and fall daylight savings time changes occur.

 

NetBackup 6.5.3.1 Hotfix is posted to the Support website.  A full list
of package links available for download can be found in the following
technote:  http://support.veritas.com/docs/319624

 

We have been updating the LBN with information on 6.5.3.1, see 
http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/315021.htm  and we will
continue to revise the FAQ http://support.veritas.com/docs/319637 

 

Thanks Bill Coleman

 

From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
[mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of
judy_hinchcli...@administaff.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 2:32 PM
To: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

 

Does anybody know if this is cumulative?

Or if you have to do 6.5.3 AND 6.5.3.1 when installing new clients?

 

Document ID: 317828 
http://support.veritas.com/docs/317828
<http://support.veritas.com/docs/317828>   E-Mail this document to a
colleague
http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/email_forms/
tnote_sndml.asp?docID=http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/317828',%
20475,%20500)>  

 

Symantec Security Advisory SYM09-002: A non-privileged but authorized
system user could potentially leverage the NetBackup network daemon
(vnetd) to attempt to gain elevated privileges on the server. 

 

<>___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

[judy_hinchcliffe]

If you open up one of the docs they sent you.
http://entsupport.symantec.com/docs/317828

down near the bottom there are links for downloading the files.

Here you will see files for servers,clients,java...

I think you should Install all that apply to your environment.


-Original Message-
From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
[mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of X_S
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2009 1:17 PM
To: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)


Can someone clarify for me if we need to install this on the master and
media only or all clients as well?clients too.

+--
|This was sent by xsp...@yahoo.com via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com.
+--


___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu



___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

[Bill Coleman]

For 6.5.4 we are just releasing a cdrom for Windows x64 due to NetBackup
getting Windows 2008 logo certification.  We are also releasing a patch
container for x64 Windows as well.

 

Other clients will be patch containers and LiveUpdate.  

 

From: Len Boyle [mailto:len.bo...@sas.com] 
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2009 10:58 AM
To: Bill Coleman; Rosenkoetter, Gabriel;
VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1
(6.5.3.1)

 

Bill, will 6.5.4 be a re-master for the windows client? 

 

Thanks len

 

 

 

From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
[mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Bill
Coleman
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2009 11:35 AM
To: Rosenkoetter, Gabriel; VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1
(6.5.3.1)

 

Correct all these 6.5.3.1 corrections are in 6.4.  In fact anyone
getting the 6.5.4 beta next week will have them.  We have processes that
assure this with audits.

 

From: Rosenkoetter, Gabriel [mailto:gabriel.rosenkoet...@radian.biz] 
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2009 10:31 AM
To: Bill Coleman; VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1
(6.5.3.1)

 

Bill, I trust that this security fix will be rolled into the 6.5.4
release, correct?

--
gabriel rosenkoetter
Radian Group Inc, Senior Systems Engineer
gabriel.rosenkoet...@radian.biz, 215 231 1556

 

 



From: Bill Coleman [mailto:bill_cole...@symantec.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2009 6:25 PM
To: judy_hinchcli...@administaff.com; VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1
(6.5.3.1)

NetBackup 6.5.3.1 Hotfix is not cumulative unless the LiveUpdate package
is used.  If you use the patch containers instead of LU, you must have
6.5.3 installed as a base.

 

6.5.3.1 is a small patch release that will address two issues with the
scheduler.  NetBackup 6.5.3.1 is the first "triple-dot" hot-fix release
produced by NetBackup, and it delivers a vulnerability fix, a scheduler
correction for windows that span midnight, and corrective fixes to the
scheduler when spring and fall daylight savings time changes occur.

 

NetBackup 6.5.3.1 Hotfix is posted to the Support website.  A full list
of package links available for download can be found in the following
technote:  http://support.veritas.com/docs/319624

 

We have been updating the LBN with information on 6.5.3.1, see 
http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/315021.htm  and we will
continue to revise the FAQ http://support.veritas.com/docs/319637 

 

Thanks Bill Coleman

 

From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
[mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of
judy_hinchcli...@administaff.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 2:32 PM
To: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

 

Does anybody know if this is cumulative?

Or if you have to do 6.5.3 AND 6.5.3.1 when installing new clients?

 

Document ID: 317828 
http://support.veritas.com/docs/317828
<http://support.veritas.com/docs/317828>   E-Mail this document to a
colleague
http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/email_forms/
tnote_sndml.asp?docID=http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/317828',%
20475,%20500)>  

 

Symantec Security Advisory SYM09-002: A non-privileged but authorized
system user could potentially leverage the NetBackup network daemon
(vnetd) to attempt to gain elevated privileges on the server. 

 

<>___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

[Ed Wilts]

On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 1:17 PM, X_S wrote:

>
> Can someone clarify for me if we need to install this on the master and
> media only or all clients as well?clients too.


The standing rule of thumb is that the master always has to be the highest
version, then media servers, then clients.  So upgrade the master, then the
media servers, then clients.

There's also an FAQ entry that says the admin consoles have to be at 6.5.3.1
if the master is 6.5.3.1.  And the standing rule of thumb is that NOM has to
be at least at the release of the master.


   .../Ed
___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

[Simon Weaver]

Thought I read the link mentioned it can be for servers and clients.

Simon 

-Original Message-
From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
[mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of X_S
Sent: 19 February 2009 19:17
To: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)



Can someone clarify for me if we need to install this on the master and
media only or all clients as well?clients too.

+--
|This was sent by xsp...@yahoo.com via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com.
+--


___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

[Len Boyle]

Bill, will 6.5.4 be a re-master for the windows client?

Thanks len



From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu 
[mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Bill Coleman
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2009 11:35 AM
To: Rosenkoetter, Gabriel; VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

Correct all these 6.5.3.1 corrections are in 6.4.  In fact anyone getting the 
6.5.4 beta next week will have them.  We have processes that assure this with 
audits.

From: Rosenkoetter, Gabriel [mailto:gabriel.rosenkoet...@radian.biz]
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2009 10:31 AM
To: Bill Coleman; VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

Bill, I trust that this security fix will be rolled into the 6.5.4 release, 
correct?

--
gabriel rosenkoetter
Radian Group Inc, Senior Systems Engineer
gabriel.rosenkoet...@radian.biz, 215 231 1556



From: Bill Coleman [mailto:bill_cole...@symantec.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2009 6:25 PM
To: judy_hinchcli...@administaff.com; VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)
NetBackup 6.5.3.1 Hotfix is not cumulative unless the LiveUpdate package is 
used.  If you use the patch containers instead of LU, you must have 6.5.3 
installed as a base.

6.5.3.1 is a small patch release that will address two issues with the 
scheduler.  NetBackup 6.5.3.1 is the first "triple-dot" hot-fix release 
produced by NetBackup, and it delivers a vulnerability fix, a scheduler 
correction for windows that span midnight, and corrective fixes to the 
scheduler when spring and fall daylight savings time changes occur.

NetBackup 6.5.3.1 Hotfix is posted to the Support website.  A full list of 
package links available for download can be found in the following technote:  
http://support.veritas.com/docs/319624

We have been updating the LBN with information on 6.5.3.1, see 
http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/315021.htm  and we will continue to 
revise the FAQ http://support.veritas.com/docs/319637

Thanks Bill Coleman

From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu 
[mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of 
judy_hinchcli...@administaff.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 2:32 PM
To: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

Does anybody know if this is cumulative?
Or if you have to do 6.5.3 AND 6.5.3.1 when installing new clients?

Document ID: 317828
http://support.veritas.com/docs/317828 [cid:image001.gif@01C99289.40AF3990] 
E-Mail this document to a 
colleaguehttp://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/email_forms/tnote_sndml.asp?docID=http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/317828',%20475,%20500)>

Symantec Security Advisory SYM09-002: A non-privileged but authorized system 
user could potentially leverage the NetBackup network daemon (vnetd) to attempt 
to gain elevated privileges on the server.

<>___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

[Bill Coleman]

Correct all these 6.5.3.1 corrections are in 6.4.  In fact anyone
getting the 6.5.4 beta next week will have them.  We have processes that
assure this with audits.

 

From: Rosenkoetter, Gabriel [mailto:gabriel.rosenkoet...@radian.biz] 
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2009 10:31 AM
To: Bill Coleman; VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1
(6.5.3.1)

 

Bill, I trust that this security fix will be rolled into the 6.5.4
release, correct?

--
gabriel rosenkoetter
Radian Group Inc, Senior Systems Engineer
gabriel.rosenkoet...@radian.biz, 215 231 1556

 

 



From: Bill Coleman [mailto:bill_cole...@symantec.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2009 6:25 PM
To: judy_hinchcli...@administaff.com; VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1
(6.5.3.1)

NetBackup 6.5.3.1 Hotfix is not cumulative unless the LiveUpdate package
is used.  If you use the patch containers instead of LU, you must have
6.5.3 installed as a base.

 

6.5.3.1 is a small patch release that will address two issues with the
scheduler.  NetBackup 6.5.3.1 is the first "triple-dot" hot-fix release
produced by NetBackup, and it delivers a vulnerability fix, a scheduler
correction for windows that span midnight, and corrective fixes to the
scheduler when spring and fall daylight savings time changes occur.

 

NetBackup 6.5.3.1 Hotfix is posted to the Support website.  A full list
of package links available for download can be found in the following
technote:  http://support.veritas.com/docs/319624

 

We have been updating the LBN with information on 6.5.3.1, see 
http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/315021.htm  and we will
continue to revise the FAQ http://support.veritas.com/docs/319637 

 

Thanks Bill Coleman

 

From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
[mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of
judy_hinchcli...@administaff.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 2:32 PM
To: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

 

Does anybody know if this is cumulative?

Or if you have to do 6.5.3 AND 6.5.3.1 when installing new clients?

 

Document ID: 317828 
http://support.veritas.com/docs/317828
<http://support.veritas.com/docs/317828>   E-Mail this document to a
colleague
http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/email_forms/
tnote_sndml.asp?docID=http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/317828',%
20475,%20500)>  

 

Symantec Security Advisory SYM09-002: A non-privileged but authorized
system user could potentially leverage the NetBackup network daemon
(vnetd) to attempt to gain elevated privileges on the server. 

 

<>___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

[Rosenkoetter, Gabriel]

Bill, I trust that this security fix will be rolled into the 6.5.4 release, 
correct?

--
gabriel rosenkoetter
Radian Group Inc, Senior Systems Engineer
gabriel.rosenkoet...@radian.biz, 215 231 1556





From: Bill Coleman [mailto:bill_cole...@symantec.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2009 6:25 PM
To: judy_hinchcli...@administaff.com; VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

NetBackup 6.5.3.1 Hotfix is not cumulative unless the LiveUpdate package is 
used.  If you use the patch containers instead of LU, you must have 6.5.3 
installed as a base.

6.5.3.1 is a small patch release that will address two issues with the 
scheduler.  NetBackup 6.5.3.1 is the first "triple-dot" hot-fix release 
produced by NetBackup, and it delivers a vulnerability fix, a scheduler 
correction for windows that span midnight, and corrective fixes to the 
scheduler when spring and fall daylight savings time changes occur.

NetBackup 6.5.3.1 Hotfix is posted to the Support website.  A full list of 
package links available for download can be found in the following technote:  
http://support.veritas.com/docs/319624

We have been updating the LBN with information on 6.5.3.1, see 
http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/315021.htm  and we will continue to 
revise the FAQ http://support.veritas.com/docs/319637

Thanks Bill Coleman

From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu 
[mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of 
judy_hinchcli...@administaff.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 2:32 PM
To: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

Does anybody know if this is cumulative?
Or if you have to do 6.5.3 AND 6.5.3.1 when installing new clients?

Document ID: 317828
http://support.veritas.com/docs/317828 [cid:023512916@19022009-110E] E-Mail 
this document to a 
colleaguehttp://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/email_forms/tnote_sndml.asp?docID=http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/317828',%20475,%20500)>

Symantec Security Advisory SYM09-002: A non-privileged but authorized system 
user could potentially leverage the NetBackup network daemon (vnetd) to attempt 
to gain elevated privileges on the server.

<>___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

[Marianne Van Den Berg]

6.5.3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1) Frequently Asked Questions:

http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/319637.htm

 

 

From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
[mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of Bill
Coleman
Sent: 19 February 2009 01:25
To: judy_hinchcli...@administaff.com; VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1
(6.5.3.1)

 

NetBackup 6.5.3.1 Hotfix is not cumulative unless the LiveUpdate package
is used.  If you use the patch containers instead of LU, you must have
6.5.3 installed as a base.

 

6.5.3.1 is a small patch release that will address two issues with the
scheduler.  NetBackup 6.5.3.1 is the first "triple-dot" hot-fix release
produced by NetBackup, and it delivers a vulnerability fix, a scheduler
correction for windows that span midnight, and corrective fixes to the
scheduler when spring and fall daylight savings time changes occur.

 

NetBackup 6.5.3.1 Hotfix is posted to the Support website.  A full list
of package links available for download can be found in the following
technote:  http://support.veritas.com/docs/319624

 

We have been updating the LBN with information on 6.5.3.1, see 
http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/315021.htm  and we will
continue to revise the FAQ http://support.veritas.com/docs/319637 

 

Thanks Bill Coleman

 

From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
[mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of
judy_hinchcli...@administaff.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 2:32 PM
To: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

 

Does anybody know if this is cumulative?

Or if you have to do 6.5.3 AND 6.5.3.1 when installing new clients?

 

Document ID: 317828 
http://support.veritas.com/docs/317828
<http://support.veritas.com/docs/317828>   E-Mail this document to a
colleague
http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/email_forms/
tnote_sndml.asp?docID=http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/317828',%
20475,%20500)>  

 

Symantec Security Advisory SYM09-002: A non-privileged but authorized
system user could potentially leverage the NetBackup network daemon
(vnetd) to attempt to gain elevated privileges on the server. 

 

<>___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

[Ed Wilts]

On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 5:24 PM, Bill Coleman wrote:

>  NetBackup 6.5.3.1 Hotfix is not cumulative unless the LiveUpdate package
> is used.  If you use the patch containers instead of LU, you must have 6.5.3
> installed as a base.
>

Since 6.5.3 is not a base release either, we're now telling our admins they
have to install 6.5, then the 6.5.3 patch, and then the 6.5.3.1 security
patch.  Can we PLEASE have a remastered 6.5.3.1 full install kit so they
only have to do one install?

Thanks,

.../Ed


Ed Wilts, RHCE, BCFP, BCSD, SCSP, SCSE
ewi...@ewilts.org
___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

[Bill Coleman]

NetBackup 6.5.3.1 Hotfix is not cumulative unless the LiveUpdate package
is used.  If you use the patch containers instead of LU, you must have
6.5.3 installed as a base.

 

6.5.3.1 is a small patch release that will address two issues with the
scheduler.  NetBackup 6.5.3.1 is the first "triple-dot" hot-fix release
produced by NetBackup, and it delivers a vulnerability fix, a scheduler
correction for windows that span midnight, and corrective fixes to the
scheduler when spring and fall daylight savings time changes occur.

 

NetBackup 6.5.3.1 Hotfix is posted to the Support website.  A full list
of package links available for download can be found in the following
technote:  http://support.veritas.com/docs/319624

 

We have been updating the LBN with information on 6.5.3.1, see 
http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/315021.htm  and we will
continue to revise the FAQ http://support.veritas.com/docs/319637 

 

Thanks Bill Coleman

 

From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
[mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of
judy_hinchcli...@administaff.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 2:32 PM
To: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 Release Update 3 Hotfix 1 (6.5.3.1)

 

Does anybody know if this is cumulative?

Or if you have to do 6.5.3 AND 6.5.3.1 when installing new clients?

 

Document ID: 317828 
http://support.veritas.com/docs/317828
   E-Mail this document to a
colleague
http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/email_forms/
tnote_sndml.asp?docID=http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/317828',%
20475,%20500)>  

 

Symantec Security Advisory SYM09-002: A non-privileged but authorized
system user could potentially leverage the NetBackup network daemon
(vnetd) to attempt to gain elevated privileges on the server. 

 

<>___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 and Quantum Scalar 50

[Rusty . Major]

It sounds to me like your library is not configured the way you want to 
use it.

The media access port (MAP/CAP/whatever you call it) is for putting tapes 
into the library. Typically this is done by opening the port, putting the 
tapes in, closing the door and doing an inventory from NetBackup. 
NetBackup will request the library to scan and import any tapes it finds, 
and then both media databases are updated. It sounds like the library is 
full, hence your failure message.

I would recommend you verify the library slots are not full. Failing that, 
you might not have enough slots licensed, or the library slot count is not 
configured properly. You also could have it configured in a way where the 
MAP is actually used as a normal tape slot. In this case you wouldn't ever 
check the box to insert from the access port and just update the inventory 
(assuming you already had the library inventory updated).

I hope that helps.

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/ 
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. 



thgreatoz  
Sent by: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
02/03/2009 01:16 PM
Please respond to
VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu


To
VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
cc

Subject
[Veritas-bu]  Netbackup 6.5 and Quantum Scalar 50








bob944 wrote:
> 
> I don't know your hardware, but are you selecting "Empty media sccess
> port prior to updating" in the inventory GUI?
> 
> If the Scalar 50 is like some other small scalar that I saw in a demo,
> when you put tapes in the slid-out magazine, a little dialog comes up on
> the control panel asking you to choose between X and Y.  One of those is
> "system," IIRC.  And I think the one you want is the "pushbutton" on the
> right side.  Without doing that, tapes stay in the magazine.



When I select that option, I get 
"media access port request reported that the robotic library is full:

   *** Failed to find an available slot to inject to ***"

whether or not there is any media in either of the passthrough ports.

+--
|This was sent by kocon...@dialogue-marketing.com via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com.
+--


___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu




___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 and Quantum Scalar 50

[Clausen, Matt R[EQ]]

Mailslots are not treated as a normal slot as far as NetBackup is concerned. 
You need to have an empty slot for the tape to go into before NetBackup can 
then move it into a drive or import it into the library. As a general rule of 
thumb, I will usually allocate one empty slot per mailslot in my libraries.

-Original Message-
From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu 
[mailto:veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu] On Behalf Of thgreatoz
Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2009 1:49 PM
To: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 and Quantum Scalar 50



bob944 wrote:
> 
> I don't know your hardware, but are you selecting "Empty media sccess
> port prior to updating" in the inventory GUI?
> 
> If the Scalar 50 is like some other small scalar that I saw in a demo,
> when you put tapes in the slid-out magazine, a little dialog comes up on
> the control panel asking you to choose between X and Y.  One of those is
> "system," IIRC.  And I think the one you want is the "pushbutton" on the
> right side.  Without doing that, tapes stay in the magazine.



When I select that option, I get 
"media access port request reported that the robotic library is full:

  *** Failed to find an available slot to inject to ***"

whether or not there is any media in either of the passthrough ports.

+--
|This was sent by kocon...@dialogue-marketing.com via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com.
+--


___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu



___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 and Quantum Scalar 50

[bob944]

> I have a server running Netbackup 6.5 on Windows Server 2003 
> x64, and a Quantum Scalar 50.  I have the robot and both 
> drives in the Scalar visible in Netbackup, I can move tapes 
> around with the Scalar's web interface, and if I manually 
> move a tape into the Passthrough ports on the Scalar, I can 
> right click on the robot, select Inventory Drive, and those 
> tapes will be added to netbackup.   However, I can't see a 
> way to move tapes that I've previously scanned from the Load 
> Ports (the magazines on the side) into the drives.  Right 
> now, it seems like if I want to do a backup job, I have to 
> manually move tapes from the load ports into the two 
> passthrough slots, and only then will the robot find the tape 
> and load it into the drives.  Is this normal behavior?  What 
> happens if I have a job that takes 3 tapes?  Will it stall out?

I don't know your hardware, but are you selecting "Empty media sccess
port prior to updating" in the inventory GUI?

If the Scalar 50 is like some other small scalar that I saw in a demo,
when you put tapes in the slid-out magazine, a little dialog comes up on
the control panel asking you to choose between X and Y.  One of those is
"system," IIRC.  And I think the one you want is the "pushbutton" on the
right side.  Without doing that, tapes stay in the magazine.



___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5.x oddity: st 0:0:0:0: reservation conflict

[Justin Piszcz]

On Wed, 7 Jan 2009, Justin Piszcz wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, 7 Jan 2009, Justin Piszcz wrote:
>
>> Anyone ever seen this before?
>> 
>> I have 4 servers, 2 old and 2 new, all run 6.5.2a, now 6.5.3 as of this 
>> morning.  I see this error occur in the logs a few moments after midnight, 
>> every night.  I did notice mt-st was not installed on the machines that 
>> were getting this error, so I installed that and we'll see if the issue 
>> recurs for tomorrow; however, was curious if anyone had seen this?
>> 
>> The first host has two directly-attached fiber drives:
>> Jan  4 00:02:19 host1 kernel: st 0:0:0:0: reservation conflict
>> Jan  5 00:01:19 host1 kernel: st 0:0:0:0: reservation conflict
>> Jan  5 00:01:47 host1 kernel: st 1:0:0:0: reservation conflict
>> Jan  6 00:01:18 host1 kernel: st 1:0:0:0: reservation conflict
>> Jan  6 00:02:18 host1 kernel: st 0:0:0:0: reservation conflict
>> Jan  7 00:01:18 host1 kernel: st 0:0:0:0: reservation conflict
>> Jan  7 00:02:20 host1 kernel: st 1:0:0:0: reservation conflict
>> 
>> The second host has one directly-attached fiber drive:
>> Jan  1 00:00:45 host2 kernel: st 0:0:0:0: reservation conflict
>> Jan  2 00:02:13 host2 kernel: st 0:0:0:0: reservation conflict
>> Jan  3 00:00:44 host2 kernel: st 0:0:0:0: reservation conflict
>> Jan  4 00:00:45 host2 kernel: st 0:0:0:0: reservation conflict
>> Jan  5 00:00:45 host2 kernel: st 0:0:0:0: reservation conflict
>> Jan  6 00:00:44 host2 kernel: st 0:0:0:0: reservation conflict
>> Jan  7 00:00:44 host2 kernel: st 0:0:0:0: reservation conflict
>> 
>> The two servers are setup identical for the most part as the other two with 
>> the exception noted above for sotware.  For hardware they are using newer 
>> HBAs etc.  However, in 6.5.x I also see the SCSI reservation option has 
>> changed:
>> 
>> In 6.0MP7:
>> Go to Master Server Properties -> Media
>> 
>> [x] Enable SCSI reserve / release
>> 
>> In 6.5.x:
>> Go to Master Server Properties -> Media
>> 
>> [x] Enable SCSI reserve
>> (o) SPC-2 SCSI reserve
>> ( ) SCSI Persistent reserve
>> 
>> 1. Do you think the issue was caused by the absence of the mt-st package on 
>> the two hosts?
>> 2. Or, are the two newer servers (with newer/different qlogic fiber cards), 
>> do they need a specific settings, perhaps SCSI Persistent reserve and not 
>> SPC-2 SCSI reserve?
>> 
>> Justin.
>> 
>
> Minor addition: It is occuring on all four servers, the kernel ring buffer 
> aka (dmesg) was filled up with other miscellaneous items, I will change the 
> SCSI reserve to be persistent and see if the errors persist.
>
> Justin.
>

Opened case with Symantec, this is a known bug in 6.5.3, 6.5.4 .. 
(when released) .. will fix this problem.  No EEB available as this does 
not /appear/ to affect backups.

Justin.
___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5.x oddity: st 0:0:0:0: reservation conflict

[Justin Piszcz]

On Wed, 7 Jan 2009, Justin Piszcz wrote:

> Anyone ever seen this before?
>
> I have 4 servers, 2 old and 2 new, all run 6.5.2a, now 6.5.3 as of this 
> morning.  I see this error occur in the logs a few moments after midnight, 
> every night.  I did notice mt-st was not installed on the machines that were 
> getting this error, so I installed that and we'll see if the issue recurs for 
> tomorrow; however, was curious if anyone had seen this?
>
> The first host has two directly-attached fiber drives:
> Jan  4 00:02:19 host1 kernel: st 0:0:0:0: reservation conflict
> Jan  5 00:01:19 host1 kernel: st 0:0:0:0: reservation conflict
> Jan  5 00:01:47 host1 kernel: st 1:0:0:0: reservation conflict
> Jan  6 00:01:18 host1 kernel: st 1:0:0:0: reservation conflict
> Jan  6 00:02:18 host1 kernel: st 0:0:0:0: reservation conflict
> Jan  7 00:01:18 host1 kernel: st 0:0:0:0: reservation conflict
> Jan  7 00:02:20 host1 kernel: st 1:0:0:0: reservation conflict
>
> The second host has one directly-attached fiber drive:
> Jan  1 00:00:45 host2 kernel: st 0:0:0:0: reservation conflict
> Jan  2 00:02:13 host2 kernel: st 0:0:0:0: reservation conflict
> Jan  3 00:00:44 host2 kernel: st 0:0:0:0: reservation conflict
> Jan  4 00:00:45 host2 kernel: st 0:0:0:0: reservation conflict
> Jan  5 00:00:45 host2 kernel: st 0:0:0:0: reservation conflict
> Jan  6 00:00:44 host2 kernel: st 0:0:0:0: reservation conflict
> Jan  7 00:00:44 host2 kernel: st 0:0:0:0: reservation conflict
>
> The two servers are setup identical for the most part as the other two with 
> the exception noted above for sotware.  For hardware they are using newer 
> HBAs etc.  However, in 6.5.x I also see the SCSI reservation option has 
> changed:
>
> In 6.0MP7:
> Go to Master Server Properties -> Media
>
> [x] Enable SCSI reserve / release
>
> In 6.5.x:
> Go to Master Server Properties -> Media
>
> [x] Enable SCSI reserve
> (o) SPC-2 SCSI reserve
> ( ) SCSI Persistent reserve
>
> 1. Do you think the issue was caused by the absence of the mt-st package on 
> the two hosts?
> 2. Or, are the two newer servers (with newer/different qlogic fiber cards), 
> do they need a specific settings, perhaps SCSI Persistent reserve and not 
> SPC-2 SCSI reserve?
>
> Justin.
>

Minor addition: It is occuring on all four servers, the kernel ring 
buffer aka (dmesg) was filled up with other miscellaneous items, I will 
change the SCSI reserve to be persistent and see if the errors persist.

Justin.
___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 New upgrade woes

[Brzozowski, Dwayne]

I also ran into this problem as well. It's been a while, but I believe
that you have to have the fully qualified domain name of your NB master
first in the hosts file. By first I mean, ip address of master, fqdn,
and then short name. Short name before fqdn will not work. 

-djb

Dwayne J. Brzozowski 
Sr. Solaris Systems Administrator
mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2008 12:28 PM
To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 New upgrade woes

I have issues with the nbpushdata -add command. We recently updated to
6.5 from 5.1

eng01adm# nbpushdata -add
Validating configured host names.
Contacting oldhost to get host information.
Failed to get host information from host: oldhost
Failed to validate configured host names.
Add hosts that are down or inaccessible by using "nbemmcmd -addhost".
After adding the hosts, you must run nbpushdata again.
Error: invalid host name (136)

eng01adm# nbpushdata -remove oldhost
Records for oldhost do not exist in EMM.
Error: invalid host name (136)

nbpushdata -show_flags returns nothing

How do I clear what is in the EMM DB? How can I remove a host that EMM
claims does not exist?

___
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] Netbackup 6.5 Updating the tapes

[Mark.Donaldson]

Only if you have a bar code reader..
 
If it's a stacker, it probably doesn't have one.



From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Obenschain, Charles T.
Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2008 11:10 AM
To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 Updating the tapes



I have a Quantum Value loader that has an 8 tape magazine.  I have
replaced all 8 tapes with fresh ones.  I have tried to update the tapes
by right clicking the Media and selecting Inventory Robot and selecting
Update Volume Configuration, but it just runs and says that the robot
and the tapes are configured correctly.  What am I doing wrong?

Also, the original tapes did not have barcode labels, but the "new"
tapes do have bar code labels on them.  So the library should be able to
tell them apart.

 

 

 

Charley Obenschain

Systems Administrator

SAIC

410-312-3768

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

 

 

___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 Client is not validated

[Jon Bousselot]

I've never seen this error either.  I would suggest you check what user the 
client running as, and does that user have sufficient rights on the client. (or 
is the password expired)
Enable the bpcd logging or increase verbosity to see if it gives you a more 
meaningful message.  I can't see any restriction on the master server if you 
initiated restores from that console, but a global setting at the master server 
(under Client Attributes) can restrict a restore and a file browse at the 
client computer.
p382 NB 6.5 Admin Guide 1 for Windows.

-Jon



- Original Message 
From: "Obenschain, Charles T." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Sent: Tuesday, September 2, 2008 9:55:40 AM
Subject: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 Client is not validated

 
I am running Netbackup 6.5 on a windows server.  I was
trying to verify the backups, by trying to restore a file, but I keep getting an
error that reads:
Error! Client is not validated to perform the requested
operation.  There is no number associated with this error.___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 Policy

[ken_zufall]

Gordon,

Check your nbevtmgr, see if it's running.  We've been having a problem 
with ours shutting down every 12 hours or so due to a memory leak.  If 
nbevtmgr isn't running, policy changes don't take effect.  You can also 
force a reread of policy/schedule information by restarting nbpem.

The fix Symantec has given us is to fall back to the 6.5 
binary...apparently this is a bug in the MP1 binary.  Not sure if we've 
done it yet as I'm on vacation right now, so don't know if it actually 
fixes the problem.

BTW, we're running our master on an HP-UX 11.23, so you could be having a 
different problem, but this is where I'd look first.

Ken Zufall
Technical Analyst
D660C
The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company
GTN 446.0592 or 330.796.0592




[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
05/16/2008 05:25 AM

To
veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
cc

Subject
[Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 Policy







Hi 

I have just upgraded to 6.5.1 and Solaris 10 for the master server. 
Yesterday I have deleted two clients from a policy, and the policy ran 
last night and this morning the activity monitor showed that it ran a 
backup for both clients? 

Thanks 

Gordon Findlay 
IT Systems Manager 
Scottish Qualifications Authority 
DDI 0845 213 5173 
FAX   0845 213 5000 
** 
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. Please notify the sender 
immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and 
delete this e-mail from your system. E-mail transmission cannot be 
guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, 
corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. 
The sender therefore does not accept liability for any errors or omissions 
in the contents of this message, which arise as a result of e-mail 
transmission. 
WARNING: Computer viruses can be transmitted by e-mail. The recipient 
should check this email and any attachments for the presence of viruses. 
SQA accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by 
this email. 
Scottish Qualifications Authority 
www.sqa.org.uk 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
** 
___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 Policy

[Ed Wilts]

On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 7:14 AM, Justin Piszcz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

> Very interesting, anyone keep a list of known issues with 6.5.1?
>

I'm sure Veritas is.  :-)

6.5.2 is imminent anyway.  I would hazard a guess that the vast majority of
the known issues with 6.5.1 won't affect the vast majority of users.  Having
end users try to keep a list of the known issues is a waste of effort in my
opinion.  If you have an issue, log a call and determine if what you're
actually seeing matches the footprint of what Veritas already knows about.

Many issues that end users see aren't actually issues at all - they're
misconfigurations, leftovers from earlier releases or conflicts with other
applications on the systems, user error, and similar things that you really
don't need to worry about.

-- 
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] Netbackup 6.5 Policy

[Justin Piszcz]

Very interesting, anyone keep a list of known issues with 6.5.1?

On Fri, 16 May 2008, Michael Graff Andersen wrote:

> I have had this issue too
>
> Unfortunately only known solution is to restart netbackup
>
> Regards
> Michael
>
> 2008/5/16, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> I have just upgraded to 6.5.1 and Solaris 10 for the master server.
>> Yesterday I have deleted two clients from a policy, and the policy ran last
>> night and this morning the activity monitor showed that it ran a backup for
>> both clients?
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Gordon Findlay
>>
>> IT Systems Manager
>>
>> Scottish Qualifications Authority
>>
>> DDI 0845 213 5173
>>
>> FAX   0845 213 5000
>>
>> **
>>
>> 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. Please notify the sender
>> immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete
>> this e-mail from your system. E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be
>> secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost,
>> destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. The sender
>> therefore does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the
>> contents of this message, which arise as a result of e-mail transmission.
>>
>> WARNING: Computer viruses can be transmitted by e-mail. The recipient should
>> check this email and any attachments for the presence of viruses. SQA
>> accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this
>> email.
>>
>> Scottish Qualifications Authority
>>
>> www.sqa.org.uk
>>
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>> **
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
>> http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
>>
>>
> ___
> Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
> http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
>
___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 Policy

[Michael Graff Andersen]

I have had this issue too

Unfortunately only known solution is to restart netbackup

Regards
Michael

2008/5/16, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Hi
>
> I have just upgraded to 6.5.1 and Solaris 10 for the master server.
> Yesterday I have deleted two clients from a policy, and the policy ran last
> night and this morning the activity monitor showed that it ran a backup for
> both clients?
>
> Thanks
>
> Gordon Findlay
>
> IT Systems Manager
>
> Scottish Qualifications Authority
>
> DDI 0845 213 5173
>
> FAX   0845 213 5000
>
> **
>
> 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. Please notify the sender
> immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete
> this e-mail from your system. E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be
> secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost,
> destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. The sender
> therefore does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the
> contents of this message, which arise as a result of e-mail transmission.
>
> WARNING: Computer viruses can be transmitted by e-mail. The recipient should
> check this email and any attachments for the presence of viruses. SQA
> accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this
> email.
>
> Scottish Qualifications Authority
>
> www.sqa.org.uk
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> **
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ___
> Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
> http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
>
>
___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size

[WEAVER, Simon (external)]

Hi Curtis
It could be the fact the product was poorly implemented on a cluster, a
Windows cluster. If I recall, it was to make a "basic" disk appear
dynamic, so you can do alot of fancy things with the Veritas Volume
Manager.
 
But it was causing some huge issues with the cluster environment, and
when a failover occurred, the disks would not always come online, and in
fact some ended up missing.
 
Spending time with Symantec (Veritas at the time), resulted in alot of
diagnostic logging / details going back & forwards to no avail.
 
End result - disks lost had to rebuild the disks, restore the data,
and the business was out for a few days, which did not bode well.
 
I think if Veritas could have fixed it, they would. In the end, the
result was to move off the software. It simply seemed to be overkill for
the function it was going to be used for.
 
Diskpart CLI does what the client wanted.. extend a volume! to this
day, I am still unsure why it was implemented, but I am sure there was a
genuine reason.
 
If it works for everyone else, then its my own experience that has
caused me to have a bad taste.
 
And clearly, there are alot of fans using it :)
Simon



From: Curtis Preston [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2008 3:22 AM
To: WEAVER, Simon (external); Ed Wilts
Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; Paul Keating
Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size



Is it just the idea of a virtual volume that you don't like, or do you
have another volume manager you like? Last time I looked, the dynamic
disks functionality in Windows is based on a stripped down version of
VxVM.  

 

---

W. Curtis Preston

Backup Blog @ www.backupcentral.com

VP Data Protection, GlassHouse Technologies



From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of WEAVER,
Simon (external)
Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 6:35 AM
To: Ed Wilts
Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; Paul Keating
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size

 

Ed

I use Robocopy alot, but I feel that the product may have been
ill-advised by someone who thought we needed the product, when clearly
we have proven this is not the case.

 

Robocopy and Diskpart :-) works like a charm!

 



From: Ed Wilts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 1:22 PM
To: WEAVER, Simon (external)
Cc: Paul Keating; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size

On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 12:27 AM, WEAVER, Simon (external)
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Personally, I am not a fan of Veritas Volume Manager, and I
certainly cannot recommend it.


That's because you're a Windows guy and the product certainly doesn't
function on Windows like it does on Unix.  If you're a Unix guy, you'll
see the limitations of Windows and its lack of a volume manager very
quickly.

My catalog is in a volume manager and yes, we've grown it.   We've
bounced a lot of our storage around between SAN frames as well as
expanded volumes.  On the other hand, my Windows admins do nothing but
bitch and moan when they have to do the same thing.  Linux, HP-UX,
Solaris, VMS - all move data nicely around.  Windows, well, just say no.

Robocopy is not an alternative to a volume manager :-)

   .../Ed

 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul
Keating
Sent: Monday, March 31, 2008 5:19 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size

Build your catalog filesytem using a Logical Volume Manager,
such as Veritas Volume Manager (Storage Foundations) on a SAN attached
LUN. As your catalog grows you can grow both the LUN and the filesystem
hot, without an outage.

Or, if you have availability of a recent Enterprise class array
such as the HDS USP-V, you can build it on a DP (Dynamic provisioned)
LUN (aka thin provisioning)

The array presents your server with a large fixed size LUN, even
several terabytes, but only occupies as much disk space as needed,
initially, then auto allocates disk as needed.

Personally, I'd just go the volume manager route.

Paul



-- 
Ed Wilts, Mounds View, MN, USA
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

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 

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size

[Curtis Preston]

Is it just the idea of a virtual volume that you don't like, or do you
have another volume manager you like? Last time I looked, the dynamic
disks functionality in Windows is based on a stripped down version of
VxVM.  

 

---

W. Curtis Preston

Backup Blog @ www.backupcentral.com

VP Data Protection, GlassHouse Technologies



From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of WEAVER,
Simon (external)
Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 6:35 AM
To: Ed Wilts
Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; Paul Keating
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size

 

Ed

I use Robocopy alot, but I feel that the product may have been
ill-advised by someone who thought we needed the product, when clearly
we have proven this is not the case.

 

Robocopy and Diskpart :-) works like a charm!

 



From: Ed Wilts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 1:22 PM
To: WEAVER, Simon (external)
Cc: Paul Keating; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size

On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 12:27 AM, WEAVER, Simon (external)
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Personally, I am not a fan of Veritas Volume Manager, and I
certainly cannot recommend it.


That's because you're a Windows guy and the product certainly doesn't
function on Windows like it does on Unix.  If you're a Unix guy, you'll
see the limitations of Windows and its lack of a volume manager very
quickly.

My catalog is in a volume manager and yes, we've grown it.   We've
bounced a lot of our storage around between SAN frames as well as
expanded volumes.  On the other hand, my Windows admins do nothing but
bitch and moan when they have to do the same thing.  Linux, HP-UX,
Solaris, VMS - all move data nicely around.  Windows, well, just say no.

Robocopy is not an alternative to a volume manager :-)

   .../Ed

 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul
Keating
Sent: Monday, March 31, 2008 5:19 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
    Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size

Build your catalog filesytem using a Logical Volume Manager,
such as Veritas Volume Manager (Storage Foundations) on a SAN attached
LUN. As your catalog grows you can grow both the LUN and the filesystem
hot, without an outage.

Or, if you have availability of a recent Enterprise class array
such as the HDS USP-V, you can build it on a DP (Dynamic provisioned)
LUN (aka thin provisioning)

The array presents your server with a large fixed size LUN, even
several terabytes, but only occupies as much disk space as needed,
initially, then auto allocates disk as needed.

Personally, I'd just go the volume manager route.

Paul



-- 
Ed Wilts, Mounds View, MN, USA
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

This email (including any attachments) may contain confidential and/or
privileged information or information otherwise protected from
disclosure.
If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender
immediately, do not copy this message or any attachments and do not use
it
for any purpose or disclose its content to any person, but delete this
message and any attachments from your system. Astrium disclaims any and
all
liability if this email transmission was virus corrupted, altered or
falsified.
-
Astrium Limited, Registered in England and Wales No. 2449259
REGISTERED OFFICE:-
Gunnels Wood Road, Stevenage, Hertfordshire, SG1 2AS, England

___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size

[Nardello, John]

Count yourself lucky you haven't used LVM on AIX. I keep dreaming of
ways to get the SAs to install Storage Foundation onto our AIX boxes. =)


- John Nardello




From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff
Lightner
Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 7:40 AM
To: WEAVER, Simon (external); Ed Wilts
Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; Paul Keating
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size



I second Ed's recommendation of Veritas Volume Manager (VxVM).   Not
just for NetBackup but for most filesystems (including those for
>terabyte databases).   The options one has for controlling things such
as buffering, block sizes etc... are important for databases.  Moreover
since it allows you to grow/shrink filesystems on the fly it is a great
tool for Production environments where downtime Is hard to get.
Finally since it allows one to do software RAID in environments where
hardware RAID isn't available it has that added benefit.

 

Most Sun Solaris shops of any size use VxVM.   Many HP HP-UX shops use
VxVM even though HP has its own Logical Volume Manager (LVM) but many
still use LVM.  On Linux most Enterprise folks use LVM which is very
much like the one on HP-UX.  AIX has one called LVM that I haven't used.

 

Using Windows for very large enterprise class environments simply isn't
an option for most folks due to scalability issues.

 



From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of WEAVER,
Simon (external)
Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 9:35 AM
To: Ed Wilts
Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; Paul Keating
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size

 

Ed

I use Robocopy alot, but I feel that the product may have been
ill-advised by someone who thought we needed the product, when clearly
we have proven this is not the case.

 

Robocopy and Diskpart :-) works like a charm!

 



From: Ed Wilts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 1:22 PM
To: WEAVER, Simon (external)
Cc: Paul Keating; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size

On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 12:27 AM, WEAVER, Simon (external)
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Personally, I am not a fan of Veritas Volume Manager, and I
certainly cannot recommend it.


That's because you're a Windows guy and the product certainly doesn't
function on Windows like it does on Unix.  If you're a Unix guy, you'll
see the limitations of Windows and its lack of a volume manager very
quickly.

My catalog is in a volume manager and yes, we've grown it.   We've
bounced a lot of our storage around between SAN frames as well as
expanded volumes.  On the other hand, my Windows admins do nothing but
bitch and moan when they have to do the same thing.  Linux, HP-UX,
Solaris, VMS - all move data nicely around.  Windows, well, just say no.

Robocopy is not an alternative to a volume manager :-)

   .../Ed

 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul
Keating
Sent: Monday, March 31, 2008 5:19 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size

Build your catalog filesytem using a Logical Volume Manager,
such as Veritas Volume Manager (Storage Foundations) on a SAN attached
LUN. As your catalog grows you can grow both the LUN and the filesystem
hot, without an outage.

Or, if you have availability of a recent Enterprise class array
such as the HDS USP-V, you can build it on a DP (Dynamic provisioned)
LUN (aka thin provisioning)

The array presents your server with a large fixed size LUN, even
several terabytes, but only occupies as much disk space as needed,
initially, then auto allocates disk as needed.

Personally, I'd just go the volume manager route.

Paul



-- 
Ed Wilts, Mounds View, MN, USA
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

This email (including any attachments) may contain confidential and/or
privileged information or information otherwise protected from
disclosure.
If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender
immediately, do not copy this message or any attachments and do not use
it
for any purpose or disclose its content to any person, but delete this
message and any attachments from your system. Astrium disclaims any and
all
liability if this email transmission was virus corrupted, altered or
falsified.
-
Astrium Limited, Registered in England and Wales No. 2449259
REGISTERED OFFICE:-
Gunnels Wood Road, Stevenage, Hertfordshire, SG1 2AS, England

--
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail may contain privileged or

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size

[Marion Hakanson]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> Is anyone using ZFS for this ? 
> 
> On Tue, 1 Apr 2008, Jeff Lightner wrote:
>> I second Ed's recommendation of Veritas Volume Manager (VxVM).   Not
>> just for NetBackup but for most filesystems (including those for
>> terabyte databases).   The options one has for controlling things such
>> . . .

Yes, we've been using ZFS since installing NetBackup 6.0MP4 late 2006.
It's particularly handy for setting a quota on the NetBackup log directory,
to keep it from eating up all your disk space.  It's snapshots are also
useful when you go to do an upgrade, making it easy to rollback if needed.
That fact that it's free doesn't hurt, either.

Regards,

Marion



___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size

[Steve Quan]

Is anyone using ZFS for this ?

/Steve
--
On Tue, 1 Apr 2008, Jeff Lightner wrote:

> I second Ed's recommendation of Veritas Volume Manager (VxVM).   Not
> just for NetBackup but for most filesystems (including those for
>> terabyte databases).   The options one has for controlling things such
> as buffering, block sizes etc... are important for databases.  Moreover
> since it allows you to grow/shrink filesystems on the fly it is a great
> tool for Production environments where downtime Is hard to get.
> Finally since it allows one to do software RAID in environments where
> hardware RAID isn't available it has that added benefit.
>
>
>
> Most Sun Solaris shops of any size use VxVM.   Many HP HP-UX shops use
> VxVM even though HP has its own Logical Volume Manager (LVM) but many
> still use LVM.  On Linux most Enterprise folks use LVM which is very
> much like the one on HP-UX.  AIX has one called LVM that I haven't used.
>
>
>
> Using Windows for very large enterprise class environments simply isn't
> an option for most folks due to scalability issues.
>
>
>
> 
>
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of WEAVER,
> Simon (external)
> Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 9:35 AM
> To: Ed Wilts
> Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; Paul Keating
> Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size
>
>
>
> Ed
>
> I use Robocopy alot, but I feel that the product may have been
> ill-advised by someone who thought we needed the product, when clearly
> we have proven this is not the case.
>
>
>
> Robocopy and Diskpart :-) works like a charm!
>
>
>
> 
>
> From: Ed Wilts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 1:22 PM
> To: WEAVER, Simon (external)
> Cc: Paul Keating; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
> veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
> Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size
>
> On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 12:27 AM, WEAVER, Simon (external)
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>   Personally, I am not a fan of Veritas Volume Manager, and I
> certainly cannot recommend it.
>
>
> That's because you're a Windows guy and the product certainly doesn't
> function on Windows like it does on Unix.  If you're a Unix guy, you'll
> see the limitations of Windows and its lack of a volume manager very
> quickly.
>
> My catalog is in a volume manager and yes, we've grown it.   We've
> bounced a lot of our storage around between SAN frames as well as
> expanded volumes.  On the other hand, my Windows admins do nothing but
> bitch and moan when they have to do the same thing.  Linux, HP-UX,
> Solaris, VMS - all move data nicely around.  Windows, well, just say no.
>
> Robocopy is not an alternative to a volume manager :-)
>
>   .../Ed
>
>
>
>   -Original Message-
>   From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul
> Keating
>   Sent: Monday, March 31, 2008 5:19 PM
>   To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
>   Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size
>
>   Build your catalog filesytem using a Logical Volume Manager,
> such as Veritas Volume Manager (Storage Foundations) on a SAN attached
> LUN. As your catalog grows you can grow both the LUN and the filesystem
> hot, without an outage.
>
>   Or, if you have availability of a recent Enterprise class array
> such as the HDS USP-V, you can build it on a DP (Dynamic provisioned)
> LUN (aka thin provisioning)
>
>   The array presents your server with a large fixed size LUN, even
> several terabytes, but only occupies as much disk space as needed,
> initially, then auto allocates disk as needed.
>
>   Personally, I'd just go the volume manager route.
>
>   Paul
>
>
>
> -- 
> Ed Wilts, Mounds View, MN, USA
> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> This email (including any attachments) may contain confidential and/or
> privileged information or information otherwise protected from
> disclosure.
> If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender
> immediately, do not copy this message or any attachments and do not use
> it
> for any purpose or disclose its content to any person, but delete this
> message and any attachments from your system. Astrium disclaims any and
> all
> liability if this email transmission was virus corrupted, altered or
> falsified.
> -
> Astrium Limited, Registered in England and Wales No. 2449259
> REGISTERED OFFICE:-
> Gunnels Wood Road, Stevenage, He

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size

[Jeff Lightner]

Yes of course we can and DO.   You can export from one server and import
on another.   We have done this on many occasions when upgrading
servers.  We also do it on a daily basis with our BCV volumes which are
synchronized with Production DB volumes on the Production servers then
split and mounted onto the NBU master so we can backup the BCV volumes
to tape without impacting Production performance.   Additionally our
main cluster environments are failover so that automatic import and
mount onto secondary nodes of what was on the primary at the time it
failed occurs.

 

I'm not a Windows admin so can't say how well it works in that
environment as we don't have it.   We do have several DBs in clusters on
Windows but I really don't know much about how those are configured.

 

However, to go beyond VxVM for databases you can even do a NO downtime
scenario for DB if you use Oracle RAC (I think Informix has an
equivalent product but haven't used it) which allows the disks to be
mounted to multiple nodes at the same time.  In the event one node fails
the database continues to run (i.e. no failover required) on the other
nodes that are still up.   The only event seen by users is they lose
their connection if it happens to be on the node that failed but on
reestablishing connection they automatically go to one of the other
nodes.   Again I've done this on UNIX/Linux but not on Windows.
Interestingly it works so well that there have been incidents where
we've had DB servers fail and no one noticed but us admins.

 

 



From: WEAVER, Simon (external) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 10:55 AM
To: Jeff Lightner; Ed Wilts
Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; Paul Keating
Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size

 

Jeff

Can you confirm one thing once your disks are allocated into a
storage group, they cannot be seen by any other Server? Say for example,
your disks are on server1, and suddenly you start getting reliability
issues, or disks missing or not coming online correctly. If you host a
powerful service on these disks, are you able to MOVE those disks to
another Server?

 

I have seen it in use on a win2k3 cluster, and as mentioned, part of the
reason for obtaining the product was to have dynamic disks - extend,
shrink on the fly, ect. 

 

A major problem occurred where the disks could not be seen by any other
server, other the Veritas software became so corrupt, we were looking at
a complete loss of Data. Could not even restore the Data back to the
volumes. Veritas support solution was "create new disk, restore from
tape". 

 

In the end, we created new disks, and restored the data back to the
volumes, but made sure the Veritas Software did not write any special
unique signature to the disks. I am not sure the client would want to
use this software again.

 

I had never had any exposure to the software until that time. But if
people are happy with it, thats great :-) For me I will steer clear.

 

 

 



From: Jeff Lightner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 3:40 PM
To: WEAVER, Simon (external); Ed Wilts
Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; Paul Keating
Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size

I second Ed's recommendation of Veritas Volume Manager (VxVM).   Not
just for NetBackup but for most filesystems (including those for
>terabyte databases).   The options one has for controlling things such
as buffering, block sizes etc... are important for databases.  Moreover
since it allows you to grow/shrink filesystems on the fly it is a great
tool for Production environments where downtime Is hard to get.
Finally since it allows one to do software RAID in environments where
hardware RAID isn't available it has that added benefit.

 

Most Sun Solaris shops of any size use VxVM.   Many HP HP-UX shops use
VxVM even though HP has its own Logical Volume Manager (LVM) but many
still use LVM.  On Linux most Enterprise folks use LVM which is very
much like the one on HP-UX.  AIX has one called LVM that I haven't used.

 

Using Windows for very large enterprise class environments simply isn't
an option for most folks due to scalability issues.

 



From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of WEAVER,
Simon (external)
Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 9:35 AM
To: Ed Wilts
Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; Paul Keating
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size

 

Ed

I use Robocopy alot, but I feel that the product may have been
ill-advised by someone who thought we needed the product, when clearly
we have proven this is not the case.

 

Robocopy and Diskpart :-) works like a charm!

 



From: Ed Wilts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 1:22 PM
To: WEAVER, Simon (external)
Cc: Paul Keating; [EMAIL

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size

[WEAVER, Simon (external)]

Jeff
Can you confirm one thing once your disks are allocated into a
storage group, they cannot be seen by any other Server? Say for example,
your disks are on server1, and suddenly you start getting reliability
issues, or disks missing or not coming online correctly. If you host a
powerful service on these disks, are you able to MOVE those disks to
another Server?
 
I have seen it in use on a win2k3 cluster, and as mentioned, part of the
reason for obtaining the product was to have dynamic disks - extend,
shrink on the fly, ect. 
 
A major problem occurred where the disks could not be seen by any other
server, other the Veritas software became so corrupt, we were looking at
a complete loss of Data. Could not even restore the Data back to the
volumes. Veritas support solution was "create new disk, restore from
tape". 
 
In the end, we created new disks, and restored the data back to the
volumes, but made sure the Veritas Software did not write any special
unique signature to the disks. I am not sure the client would want to
use this software again.
 
I had never had any exposure to the software until that time. But if
people are happy with it, thats great :-) For me I will steer clear.
 
 



From: Jeff Lightner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 3:40 PM
To: WEAVER, Simon (external); Ed Wilts
Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; Paul Keating
Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size



I second Ed's recommendation of Veritas Volume Manager (VxVM).   Not
just for NetBackup but for most filesystems (including those for
>terabyte databases).   The options one has for controlling things such
as buffering, block sizes etc... are important for databases.  Moreover
since it allows you to grow/shrink filesystems on the fly it is a great
tool for Production environments where downtime Is hard to get.
Finally since it allows one to do software RAID in environments where
hardware RAID isn't available it has that added benefit.

 

Most Sun Solaris shops of any size use VxVM.   Many HP HP-UX shops use
VxVM even though HP has its own Logical Volume Manager (LVM) but many
still use LVM.  On Linux most Enterprise folks use LVM which is very
much like the one on HP-UX.  AIX has one called LVM that I haven't used.

 

Using Windows for very large enterprise class environments simply isn't
an option for most folks due to scalability issues.

 



From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of WEAVER,
Simon (external)
Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 9:35 AM
To: Ed Wilts
Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; Paul Keating
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size

 

Ed

I use Robocopy alot, but I feel that the product may have been
ill-advised by someone who thought we needed the product, when clearly
we have proven this is not the case.

 

Robocopy and Diskpart :-) works like a charm!

 



From: Ed Wilts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 1:22 PM
To: WEAVER, Simon (external)
Cc: Paul Keating; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size

On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 12:27 AM, WEAVER, Simon (external)
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Personally, I am not a fan of Veritas Volume Manager, and I
certainly cannot recommend it.


That's because you're a Windows guy and the product certainly doesn't
function on Windows like it does on Unix.  If you're a Unix guy, you'll
see the limitations of Windows and its lack of a volume manager very
quickly.

My catalog is in a volume manager and yes, we've grown it.   We've
bounced a lot of our storage around between SAN frames as well as
expanded volumes.  On the other hand, my Windows admins do nothing but
bitch and moan when they have to do the same thing.  Linux, HP-UX,
Solaris, VMS - all move data nicely around.  Windows, well, just say no.

Robocopy is not an alternative to a volume manager :-)

   .../Ed

 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul
Keating
Sent: Monday, March 31, 2008 5:19 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size

Build your catalog filesytem using a Logical Volume Manager,
such as Veritas Volume Manager (Storage Foundations) on a SAN attached
LUN. As your catalog grows you can grow both the LUN and the filesystem
hot, without an outage.

Or, if you have availability of a recent Enterprise class array
such as the HDS USP-V, you can build it on a DP (Dynamic provisioned)
LUN (aka thin provisioning)

The array presents your server with a large fixed size LUN, even
several terabytes, but only occupies as much disk space as needed,
initially,

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size

[WEAVER, Simon (external)]

thats possible Paul, but I had not implemented the software, and can only 
comment on my own experience and problems with the Support at the time.

Just posted another comment about this earlier :-)

Want a tissue to clean the coffee :-P 

-Original Message-
From: Paul Keating [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 3:52 PM
To: WEAVER, Simon (external); veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size

*cough*

Sorrymy coffee came out my nose.
:o\

You being a Windows guy, I'm assuming this must be due to something about how 
VxVM works on/with Windows.

The flexibility of a volume manager, in general, is more than "a good thing" 
(TM), it's a requirement.
Sure, not necessarily VxVM...we use LVM2 on some RHEL boxes, but VxVM is so 
easy to manage that it makes up for the cost.

Paul

-- 


> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of 
> WEAVER, Simon (external)
> Sent: April 01, 2008 1:27 AM
> To: Paul Keating; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 
> veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
> Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size
> 
> 
> 
> Personally, I am not a fan of Veritas Volume Manager, and I certainly 
> cannot recommend it.
> 
> 


La version française suit le texte anglais.



This email may contain privileged and/or confidential information, and the Bank 
of Canada does not waive any related rights. Any distribution, use, or copying 
of this email or the information it contains by other than the intended 
recipient is unauthorized. If you received this email in error please delete it 
immediately from your system and notify the sender promptly by email that you 
have done so. 



Le présent courriel peut contenir de l'information privilégiée ou 
confidentielle.
La Banque du Canada ne renonce pas aux droits qui s'y rapportent. Toute 
diffusion, utilisation ou copie de ce courriel ou des renseignements qu'il 
contient par une personne autre que le ou les destinataires désignés est 
interdite. Si vous recevez ce courriel par erreur, veuillez le supprimer 
immédiatement et envoyer sans délai à l'expéditeur un message électronique pour 
l'aviser que vous avez éliminé de votre ordinateur toute copie du courriel reçu.

This email (including any attachments) may contain confidential and/or
privileged information or information otherwise protected from disclosure.
If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender
immediately, do not copy this message or any attachments and do not use it
for any purpose or disclose its content to any person, but delete this
message and any attachments from your system. Astrium disclaims any and all
liability if this email transmission was virus corrupted, altered or
falsified.
-
Astrium Limited, Registered in England and Wales No. 2449259
REGISTERED OFFICE:-
Gunnels Wood Road, Stevenage, Hertfordshire, SG1 2AS, England

___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size

[Paul Keating]

*cough*

Sorrymy coffee came out my nose.
:o\

You being a Windows guy, I'm assuming this must be due to something
about how VxVM works on/with Windows.

The flexibility of a volume manager, in general, is more than "a good
thing" (TM), it's a requirement.
Sure, not necessarily VxVM...we use LVM2 on some RHEL boxes, but VxVM is
so easy to manage that it makes up for the cost.

Paul

-- 


> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf 
> Of WEAVER, Simon (external)
> Sent: April 01, 2008 1:27 AM
> To: Paul Keating; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 
> veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
> Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size
> 
> 
> 
> Personally, I am not a fan of Veritas Volume Manager, and I 
> certainly cannot recommend it.
> 
> 


La version française suit le texte anglais.



This email may contain privileged and/or confidential information, and the Bank 
of
Canada does not waive any related rights. Any distribution, use, or copying of 
this
email or the information it contains by other than the intended recipient is
unauthorized. If you received this email in error please delete it immediately 
from
your system and notify the sender promptly by email that you have done so. 



Le présent courriel peut contenir de l'information privilégiée ou 
confidentielle.
La Banque du Canada ne renonce pas aux droits qui s'y rapportent. Toute 
diffusion,
utilisation ou copie de ce courriel ou des renseignements qu'il contient par une
personne autre que le ou les destinataires désignés est interdite. Si vous 
recevez
ce courriel par erreur, veuillez le supprimer immédiatement et envoyer sans 
délai à
l'expéditeur un message électronique pour l'aviser que vous avez éliminé de 
votre
ordinateur toute copie du courriel reçu.

___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size

[Jeff Lightner]

I second Ed's recommendation of Veritas Volume Manager (VxVM).   Not
just for NetBackup but for most filesystems (including those for
>terabyte databases).   The options one has for controlling things such
as buffering, block sizes etc... are important for databases.  Moreover
since it allows you to grow/shrink filesystems on the fly it is a great
tool for Production environments where downtime Is hard to get.
Finally since it allows one to do software RAID in environments where
hardware RAID isn't available it has that added benefit.

 

Most Sun Solaris shops of any size use VxVM.   Many HP HP-UX shops use
VxVM even though HP has its own Logical Volume Manager (LVM) but many
still use LVM.  On Linux most Enterprise folks use LVM which is very
much like the one on HP-UX.  AIX has one called LVM that I haven't used.

 

Using Windows for very large enterprise class environments simply isn't
an option for most folks due to scalability issues.

 



From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of WEAVER,
Simon (external)
Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 9:35 AM
To: Ed Wilts
Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu; Paul Keating
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size

 

Ed

I use Robocopy alot, but I feel that the product may have been
ill-advised by someone who thought we needed the product, when clearly
we have proven this is not the case.

 

Robocopy and Diskpart :-) works like a charm!

 



From: Ed Wilts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 1:22 PM
To: WEAVER, Simon (external)
Cc: Paul Keating; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size

On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 12:27 AM, WEAVER, Simon (external)
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Personally, I am not a fan of Veritas Volume Manager, and I
certainly cannot recommend it.


That's because you're a Windows guy and the product certainly doesn't
function on Windows like it does on Unix.  If you're a Unix guy, you'll
see the limitations of Windows and its lack of a volume manager very
quickly.

My catalog is in a volume manager and yes, we've grown it.   We've
bounced a lot of our storage around between SAN frames as well as
expanded volumes.  On the other hand, my Windows admins do nothing but
bitch and moan when they have to do the same thing.  Linux, HP-UX,
Solaris, VMS - all move data nicely around.  Windows, well, just say no.

Robocopy is not an alternative to a volume manager :-)

   .../Ed

 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul
Keating
Sent: Monday, March 31, 2008 5:19 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size

Build your catalog filesytem using a Logical Volume Manager,
such as Veritas Volume Manager (Storage Foundations) on a SAN attached
LUN. As your catalog grows you can grow both the LUN and the filesystem
hot, without an outage.

Or, if you have availability of a recent Enterprise class array
such as the HDS USP-V, you can build it on a DP (Dynamic provisioned)
LUN (aka thin provisioning)

The array presents your server with a large fixed size LUN, even
several terabytes, but only occupies as much disk space as needed,
initially, then auto allocates disk as needed.

Personally, I'd just go the volume manager route.

Paul



-- 
Ed Wilts, Mounds View, MN, USA
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

This email (including any attachments) may contain confidential and/or
privileged information or information otherwise protected from
disclosure.
If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender
immediately, do not copy this message or any attachments and do not use
it
for any purpose or disclose its content to any person, but delete this
message and any attachments from your system. Astrium disclaims any and
all
liability if this email transmission was virus corrupted, altered or
falsified.
-
Astrium Limited, Registered in England and Wales No. 2449259
REGISTERED OFFICE:-
Gunnels Wood Road, Stevenage, Hertfordshire, SG1 2AS, England
--
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail may contain privileged or confidential 
information and is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). If you are 
not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of 
the contents of this information is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have 
received this electronic transmission in error, please reply immediately to the 
sender that you have received the message in error, and delete it. Thank you.
--
_

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size

[Tony T.]

On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 12:27 AM, WEAVER, Simon (external) <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>
> Personally, I am not a fan of Veritas Volume Manager, and I certainly
> cannot recommend it.
>

Just out of curiosity, why?

And do you prefer a different volume manager?

>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Keating
> Sent: Monday, March 31, 2008 5:19 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
> Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size
>
> Build your catalog filesytem using a Logical Volume Manager, such as
> Veritas Volume Manager (Storage Foundations) on a SAN attached LUN. As your
> catalog grows you can grow both the LUN and the filesystem hot, without an
> outage.
>
> Or, if you have availability of a recent Enterprise class array such as
> the HDS USP-V, you can build it on a DP (Dynamic provisioned) LUN (aka thin
> provisioning)
>
> The array presents your server with a large fixed size LUN, even several
> terabytes, but only occupies as much disk space as needed, initially, then
> auto allocates disk as needed.
>
> Personally, I'd just go the volume manager route.
>
> Paul
>
> --
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> > Dariusz Klar
> > Sent: March 28, 2008 9:03 AM
> > To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
> > Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size
> >
> >
> > Ed,
> >
> > I know the general rules, but... Another challenge for me is to
> > estimate disk space for NetBackup catalog where total amount of data
> > under NetBackup protection is 3.6 PB (peta bytes) with ability to grow
> > to 8.5 PB in the future.
> >
> > The difference between 1% and 2% of total amount of protected data for
> > catalog does matter. The difference vary from 36 TB to 85 TB in case
> > of 1% difference. I need to be more precise. If I will say to my
> > customer that they have to buy 255 TB (3% of total amount of data in
> > the future) for NetBackup catalog, I have to be 100% sure what I'm
> > talking about.
> >
> > I called Symantec and with that big data volume they are not 100% sure
> > about space size for NetBackup catalog.
> >
> > In this case "size" does matter ;-) Small mistake can cost a lot of
> > money.
> >
> > regards,
> >
> > Darek
> >
> > Ed Wilts wrote:
> > > On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 3:52 AM, Dariusz Klar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
> > >
> > > Recently I noticed that indexes are consuming a lot of
> > disk space.
> > > Does
> > > anyone know the rule, how to plan space for indexes? Looks like
> > > something has changed since older versions of NetBackup.
> > >
> > >
> > > I don't think anything has changed.  The challenge in
> > planning is that
> > > the catalog size is based on number of files you're backing up, not
> > > the size of the files.  If you back up a lot of small files, your
> > > catalog will be much larger than the site that backs up the same
> > > amount of disk space containint large databases.  The longer the
> > > retentions, the more likely it is that you'll need a larger catalog
> > > for backing up the same amount of disk space.
> > >
> > > The golden rule to remember is to never, ever fill your
> > catalog disk.
> > > Use a different file system for your logs since they're the most
> > > likely thing to fill the disk.
> > >
> >
> > ___
> > Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
> > http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
> >
>
> 
>
> 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.
>
>
> 

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size

[WEAVER, Simon (external)]

Ed
I use Robocopy alot, but I feel that the product may have been
ill-advised by someone who thought we needed the product, when clearly
we have proven this is not the case.
 
Robocopy and Diskpart :-) works like a charm!



From: Ed Wilts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 1:22 PM
To: WEAVER, Simon (external)
Cc: Paul Keating; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size


On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 12:27 AM, WEAVER, Simon (external)
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:



Personally, I am not a fan of Veritas Volume Manager, and I
certainly cannot recommend it.


That's because you're a Windows guy and the product certainly doesn't
function on Windows like it does on Unix.  If you're a Unix guy, you'll
see the limitations of Windows and its lack of a volume manager very
quickly.

My catalog is in a volume manager and yes, we've grown it.   We've
bounced a lot of our storage around between SAN frames as well as
expanded volumes.  On the other hand, my Windows admins do nothing but
bitch and moan when they have to do the same thing.  Linux, HP-UX,
Solaris, VMS - all move data nicely around.  Windows, well, just say no.

Robocopy is not an alternative to a volume manager :-)

   .../Ed




-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul
Keating
Sent: Monday, March 31, 2008 5:19 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
        Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size

Build your catalog filesytem using a Logical Volume Manager,
such as Veritas Volume Manager (Storage Foundations) on a SAN attached
LUN. As your catalog grows you can grow both the LUN and the filesystem
hot, without an outage.

Or, if you have availability of a recent Enterprise class array
such as the HDS USP-V, you can build it on a DP (Dynamic provisioned)
LUN (aka thin provisioning)

The array presents your server with a large fixed size LUN, even
several terabytes, but only occupies as much disk space as needed,
initially, then auto allocates disk as needed.

Personally, I'd just go the volume manager route.

Paul




-- 
Ed Wilts, Mounds View, MN, USA
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 


This email (including any attachments) may contain confidential and/or
privileged information or information otherwise protected from disclosure.
If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender
immediately, do not copy this message or any attachments and do not use it
for any purpose or disclose its content to any person, but delete this
message and any attachments from your system. Astrium disclaims any and all
liability if this email transmission was virus corrupted, altered or
falsified.
-
Astrium Limited, Registered in England and Wales No. 2449259
REGISTERED OFFICE:-
Gunnels Wood Road, Stevenage, Hertfordshire, SG1 2AS, England___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size

[Ed Wilts]

On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 12:27 AM, WEAVER, Simon (external) <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>
> Personally, I am not a fan of Veritas Volume Manager, and I certainly
> cannot recommend it.


That's because you're a Windows guy and the product certainly doesn't
function on Windows like it does on Unix.  If you're a Unix guy, you'll see
the limitations of Windows and its lack of a volume manager very quickly.

My catalog is in a volume manager and yes, we've grown it.   We've bounced a
lot of our storage around between SAN frames as well as expanded volumes.
On the other hand, my Windows admins do nothing but bitch and moan when they
have to do the same thing.  Linux, HP-UX, Solaris, VMS - all move data
nicely around.  Windows, well, just say no.

Robocopy is not an alternative to a volume manager :-)

   .../Ed


> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Keating
> Sent: Monday, March 31, 2008 5:19 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
> Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size
>
> Build your catalog filesytem using a Logical Volume Manager, such as
> Veritas Volume Manager (Storage Foundations) on a SAN attached LUN. As your
> catalog grows you can grow both the LUN and the filesystem hot, without an
> outage.
>
> Or, if you have availability of a recent Enterprise class array such as
> the HDS USP-V, you can build it on a DP (Dynamic provisioned) LUN (aka thin
> provisioning)
>
> The array presents your server with a large fixed size LUN, even several
> terabytes, but only occupies as much disk space as needed, initially, then
> auto allocates disk as needed.
>
> Personally, I'd just go the volume manager route.
>
> Paul
>


-- 
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] NetBackup 6.5 index size

[WEAVER, Simon (external)]

Personally, I am not a fan of Veritas Volume Manager, and I certainly cannot 
recommend it.


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Keating
Sent: Monday, March 31, 2008 5:19 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size

Build your catalog filesytem using a Logical Volume Manager, such as Veritas 
Volume Manager (Storage Foundations) on a SAN attached LUN. As your catalog 
grows you can grow both the LUN and the filesystem hot, without an outage.

Or, if you have availability of a recent Enterprise class array such as the HDS 
USP-V, you can build it on a DP (Dynamic provisioned) LUN (aka thin 
provisioning)

The array presents your server with a large fixed size LUN, even several 
terabytes, but only occupies as much disk space as needed, initially, then auto 
allocates disk as needed.

Personally, I'd just go the volume manager route.

Paul

-- 


> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of 
> Dariusz Klar
> Sent: March 28, 2008 9:03 AM
> To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
> Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size
> 
> 
> Ed,
> 
> I know the general rules, but... Another challenge for me is to 
> estimate disk space for NetBackup catalog where total amount of data 
> under NetBackup protection is 3.6 PB (peta bytes) with ability to grow 
> to 8.5 PB in the future.
> 
> The difference between 1% and 2% of total amount of protected data for 
> catalog does matter. The difference vary from 36 TB to 85 TB in case 
> of 1% difference. I need to be more precise. If I will say to my 
> customer that they have to buy 255 TB (3% of total amount of data in 
> the future) for NetBackup catalog, I have to be 100% sure what I'm 
> talking about.
> 
> I called Symantec and with that big data volume they are not 100% sure 
> about space size for NetBackup catalog.
> 
> In this case "size" does matter ;-) Small mistake can cost a lot of 
> money.
> 
> regards,
> 
> Darek
> 
> Ed Wilts wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 3:52 AM, Dariusz Klar <[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
> >
> > Recently I noticed that indexes are consuming a lot of
> disk space.
> > Does
> > anyone know the rule, how to plan space for indexes? Looks like
> > something has changed since older versions of NetBackup.
> >
> >  
> > I don't think anything has changed.  The challenge in
> planning is that
> > the catalog size is based on number of files you're backing up, not 
> > the size of the files.  If you back up a lot of small files, your 
> > catalog will be much larger than the site that backs up the same 
> > amount of disk space containint large databases.  The longer the 
> > retentions, the more likely it is that you'll need a larger catalog 
> > for backing up the same amount of disk space.
> >  
> > The golden rule to remember is to never, ever fill your
> catalog disk.  
> > Use a different file system for your logs since they're the most 
> > likely thing to fill the disk.
> >  
> 
> ___
> Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu 
> http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
> 


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 

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size

[Paul Keating]

Build your catalog filesytem using a Logical Volume Manager, such as
Veritas Volume Manager (Storage Foundations) on a SAN attached LUN. As
your catalog grows you can grow both the LUN and the filesystem hot,
without an outage.

Or, if you have availability of a recent Enterprise class array such as
the HDS USP-V, you can build it on a DP (Dynamic provisioned) LUN (aka
thin provisioning)

The array presents your server with a large fixed size LUN, even several
terabytes, but only occupies as much disk space as needed, initially,
then auto allocates disk as needed.

Personally, I'd just go the volume manager route.

Paul

-- 


> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf 
> Of Dariusz Klar
> Sent: March 28, 2008 9:03 AM
> To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
> Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size
> 
> 
> Ed,
> 
> I know the general rules, but... Another challenge for me is 
> to estimate 
> disk space for NetBackup catalog where total amount of data under 
> NetBackup protection is 3.6 PB (peta bytes) with ability to 
> grow to 8.5 
> PB in the future.
> 
> The difference between 1% and 2% of total amount of protected 
> data for 
> catalog does matter. The difference vary from 36 TB to 85 TB 
> in case of 
> 1% difference. I need to be more precise. If I will say to my 
> customer 
> that they have to buy 255 TB (3% of total amount of data in 
> the future) 
> for NetBackup catalog, I have to be 100% sure what I'm talking about.
> 
> I called Symantec and with that big data volume they are not 
> 100% sure 
> about space size for NetBackup catalog.
> 
> In this case "size" does matter ;-) Small mistake can cost a 
> lot of money.
> 
> regards,
> 
> Darek
> 
> Ed Wilts wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 3:52 AM, Dariusz Klar <[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
> >
> > Recently I noticed that indexes are consuming a lot of 
> disk space.
> > Does
> > anyone know the rule, how to plan space for indexes? Looks like
> > something has changed since older versions of NetBackup.
> >
> >  
> > I don't think anything has changed.  The challenge in 
> planning is that 
> > the catalog size is based on number of files you're backing up, not 
> > the size of the files.  If you back up a lot of small files, your 
> > catalog will be much larger than the site that backs up the same 
> > amount of disk space containint large databases.  The longer the 
> > retentions, the more likely it is that you'll need a larger catalog 
> > for backing up the same amount of disk space.
> >  
> > The golden rule to remember is to never, ever fill your 
> catalog disk.  
> > Use a different file system for your logs since they're the most 
> > likely thing to fill the disk.
> >  
> 
> ___
> Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
> http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
> 


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] NetBackup 6.5 index size

[Dariusz Klar]

Folks,

Thanks a lot for your comments and advises. Ed, especially thank you for 
your detailed info! Very useful.

regards,

Darek


Ed Wilts wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 8:03 AM, Dariusz Klar <[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> > wrote:
>
> I know the general rules, but... Another challenge for me is to
> estimate
> disk space for NetBackup catalog where total amount of data under
> NetBackup protection is 3.6 PB (peta bytes) with ability to grow
> to 8.5
> PB in the future.
>
>
> Yes, size matters.  but if that 3.6PB consists of 10k tiff files (and 
> I would feel your pain!), your catalog would be significantly larger 
> than if it consists of 100GB Oracle tables.
>  
>
> The difference between 1% and 2% of total amount of protected data for
> catalog does matter. The difference vary from 36 TB to 85 TB in
> case of
> 1% difference. I need to be more precise. If I will say to my customer
> that they have to buy 255 TB (3% of total amount of data in the
> future)
> for NetBackup catalog, I have to be 100% sure what I'm talking about.
>
> I called Symantec and with that big data volume they are not 100% sure
> about space size for NetBackup catalog.
>
>
> Data volume does not matter - the number of unique filenames does.  I 
> could design the application to put 100 files in 100 directories and 
> end up with a much larger catalog than if I put those 10,000 files in 
> a single directory.
>
> If the data is all transitory and your retentions are long, the 
> catalog will be much larger than if the data was fairly stagnant or 
> retentions short.  My Exchange environment is about 3TB or so and my 
> catalog for that is about 2.2MB - that's under 0.01%.  I have about 
> the same amount of disk space in an environment that has host-based 
> mirror sets, longer retentions, more transitory data, and small 
> files.  The catalog for that is 25GB - 1,000 times larger for the same 
> amount of disk space.  Even that is only 0.8% of allocated disk 
> space.  I have a 27TB application that requires 147GB of catalog space 
> - about 0.5% - and it too has lots of little files.
>
> My total catalog size is under 600GB and we have about a 340GB of 
> allocated disk space (that's SAN based and doesn't count the servers 
> with local disk space or volumes that have host-based mirrors).  
> That's about 0.2% of allocated space, nowhere near the 1-3% that 
> you've been looking at.  Again, how you use and back up your data will 
> have a very significant impact on your catalog size.
>
> If your customer can tell you exactly how they're going to use the 
> disk space and what their backup policies and retentions are going to 
> be, then you can be more accurate in calculating a catalog size.  If 
> they can't, you're not going to have enough information to make a 
> useful prediction.
>


___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size

[Rusty . Major]

Pre 6.x versions had a formula for estimating catalog size in the manual. 
I haven't seen it in the 6.x docs, but I'm sure it is there somewhere. As 
Ed stated, the more objects the catalog has to keep track of, the larger 
it will be. You also should consider any duplications you'll be doing, 
either from dssu's or vault.

Also, if you think your catalog will be pretty big, I'd recommend getting 
with a backline engineer to find out what kind of things to expect if the 
catalog approaches a certain size. It would be interesting to find out 
what the theoretical size limit of the new database would be.

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/ 
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. 



"Ed Wilts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
03/28/2008 10:27 AM

To
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc
veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject
Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size






On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 8:03 AM, Dariusz Klar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
I know the general rules, but... Another challenge for me is to estimate
disk space for NetBackup catalog where total amount of data under
NetBackup protection is 3.6 PB (peta bytes) with ability to grow to 8.5
PB in the future.

Yes, size matters.  but if that 3.6PB consists of 10k tiff files (and I 
would feel your pain!), your catalog would be significantly larger than if 
it consists of 100GB Oracle tables.
 
The difference between 1% and 2% of total amount of protected data for
catalog does matter. The difference vary from 36 TB to 85 TB in case of
1% difference. I need to be more precise. If I will say to my customer
that they have to buy 255 TB (3% of total amount of data in the future)
for NetBackup catalog, I have to be 100% sure what I'm talking about.

I called Symantec and with that big data volume they are not 100% sure
about space size for NetBackup catalog.

Data volume does not matter - the number of unique filenames does.  I 
could design the application to put 100 files in 100 directories and end 
up with a much larger catalog than if I put those 10,000 files in a single 
directory.

If the data is all transitory and your retentions are long, the catalog 
will be much larger than if the data was fairly stagnant or retentions 
short.  My Exchange environment is about 3TB or so and my catalog for that 
is about 2.2MB - that's under 0.01%.  I have about the same amount of disk 
space in an environment that has host-based mirror sets, longer 
retentions, more transitory data, and small files.  The catalog for that 
is 25GB - 1,000 times larger for the same amount of disk space.  Even that 
is only 0.8% of allocated disk space.  I have a 27TB application that 
requires 147GB of catalog space - about 0.5% - and it too has lots of 
little files.

My total catalog size is under 600GB and we have about a 340GB of 
allocated disk space (that's SAN based and doesn't count the servers with 
local disk space or volumes that have host-based mirrors).  That's about 
0.2% of allocated space, nowhere near the 1-3% that you've been looking 
at.  Again, how you use and back up your data will have a very significant 
impact on your catalog size.

If your customer can tell you exactly how they're going to use the disk 
space and what their backup policies and retentions are going to be, then 
you can be more accurate in calculating a catalog size.  If they can't, 
you're not going to have enough information to make a useful prediction.

-- 
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


___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size

[Ed Wilts]

On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 8:03 AM, Dariusz Klar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I know the general rules, but... Another challenge for me is to estimate
> disk space for NetBackup catalog where total amount of data under
> NetBackup protection is 3.6 PB (peta bytes) with ability to grow to 8.5
> PB in the future.


Yes, size matters.  but if that 3.6PB consists of 10k tiff files (and I
would feel your pain!), your catalog would be significantly larger than if
it consists of 100GB Oracle tables.


> The difference between 1% and 2% of total amount of protected data for
> catalog does matter. The difference vary from 36 TB to 85 TB in case of
> 1% difference. I need to be more precise. If I will say to my customer
> that they have to buy 255 TB (3% of total amount of data in the future)
> for NetBackup catalog, I have to be 100% sure what I'm talking about.
>
> I called Symantec and with that big data volume they are not 100% sure
> about space size for NetBackup catalog.


Data volume does not matter - the number of unique filenames does.  I could
design the application to put 100 files in 100 directories and end up with a
much larger catalog than if I put those 10,000 files in a single directory.

If the data is all transitory and your retentions are long, the catalog will
be much larger than if the data was fairly stagnant or retentions short.  My
Exchange environment is about 3TB or so and my catalog for that is about
2.2MB - that's under 0.01%.  I have about the same amount of disk space in
an environment that has host-based mirror sets, longer retentions, more
transitory data, and small files.  The catalog for that is 25GB - 1,000
times larger for the same amount of disk space.  Even that is only 0.8% of
allocated disk space.  I have a 27TB application that requires 147GB of
catalog space - about 0.5% - and it too has lots of little files.

My total catalog size is under 600GB and we have about a 340GB of allocated
disk space (that's SAN based and doesn't count the servers with local disk
space or volumes that have host-based mirrors).  That's about 0.2% of
allocated space, nowhere near the 1-3% that you've been looking at.  Again,
how you use and back up your data will have a very significant impact on
your catalog size.

If your customer can tell you exactly how they're going to use the disk
space and what their backup policies and retentions are going to be, then
you can be more accurate in calculating a catalog size.  If they can't,
you're not going to have enough information to make a useful prediction.

-- 
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] NetBackup 6.5 index size

[Dariusz Klar]

Ed,

I know the general rules, but... Another challenge for me is to estimate 
disk space for NetBackup catalog where total amount of data under 
NetBackup protection is 3.6 PB (peta bytes) with ability to grow to 8.5 
PB in the future.

The difference between 1% and 2% of total amount of protected data for 
catalog does matter. The difference vary from 36 TB to 85 TB in case of 
1% difference. I need to be more precise. If I will say to my customer 
that they have to buy 255 TB (3% of total amount of data in the future) 
for NetBackup catalog, I have to be 100% sure what I'm talking about.

I called Symantec and with that big data volume they are not 100% sure 
about space size for NetBackup catalog.

In this case "size" does matter ;-) Small mistake can cost a lot of money.

regards,

Darek

Ed Wilts wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 3:52 AM, Dariusz Klar <[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> > wrote:
>
> Recently I noticed that indexes are consuming a lot of disk space.
> Does
> anyone know the rule, how to plan space for indexes? Looks like
> something has changed since older versions of NetBackup.
>
>  
> I don't think anything has changed.  The challenge in planning is that 
> the catalog size is based on number of files you're backing up, not 
> the size of the files.  If you back up a lot of small files, your 
> catalog will be much larger than the site that backs up the same 
> amount of disk space containint large databases.  The longer the 
> retentions, the more likely it is that you'll need a larger catalog 
> for backing up the same amount of disk space.
>  
> The golden rule to remember is to never, ever fill your catalog disk.  
> Use a different file system for your logs since they're the most 
> likely thing to fill the disk.
>  

___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size

[Ed Wilts]

On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 3:52 AM, Dariusz Klar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Recently I noticed that indexes are consuming a lot of disk space. Does
> anyone know the rule, how to plan space for indexes? Looks like
> something has changed since older versions of NetBackup.


I don't think anything has changed.  The challenge in planning is that the
catalog size is based on number of files you're backing up, not the size of
the files.  If you back up a lot of small files, your catalog will be much
larger than the site that backs up the same amount of disk space containint
large databases.  The longer the retentions, the more likely it is that
you'll need a larger catalog for backing up the same amount of disk space.

The golden rule to remember is to never, ever fill your catalog disk.  Use a
different file system for your logs since they're the most likely thing to
fill the disk.

   .../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] NetBackup 6.5 index size

[WEAVER, Simon (external)]

No problem Darek
Like I said, I am no guru on here, just trying to provide some help
where I possibly can

Greetings
Simon 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dariusz
Klar
Sent: Friday, March 28, 2008 10:30 AM
To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size

Thanks Simon for your incredible fast response :-) The purpose of my
question is that I have to plan disk space used by indexes (catalog) for
NetBackup environment. Estimated size of data under NetBackup protection
is 110 TB (tera bytes). All I know is that file size in this environment
is "typical" or "medium in size", whatever it means.

My first estimation was 1% of 110TB, but after I noticed that catalog
consumes much more space than expected I increased my estimation to 3%.

regards,

Darek

WEAVER, Simon (external) wrote:
> Ok so you do mean the catalog :)
> Im not too sure much has changed, but using the catalog tool, you can 
> redirect the catalog images to an alternative location.
>
> Something like this document may help...
>
> http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/269996.htm
>
> Look for the section moving the netbackup image catalog. I do this

> all the time, to free up the default space of its original location 
> :-)
>
> HTH
>
> Simon
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of 
> Dariusz Klar
> Sent: Friday, March 28, 2008 9:23 AM
> To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
> Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size
>
> I mean /opt/openv/netbackup/db/images.
>
> rgr,
>
> Darek
>
>
>
> WEAVER, Simon (external) wrote:
>   
>> Darek
>> I am certainly no guru, and I have not used 6.5 yet, but what do you 
>> mean by "Index" ? Catalog information?
>> Simon
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of 
>> Dariusz Klar
>> Sent: Friday, March 28, 2008 8:52 AM
>> To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
>> Subject: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size
>>
>> Gurus,
>>
>> Recently I noticed that indexes are consuming a lot of disk space. 
>> Does anyone know the rule, how to plan space for indexes? Looks like 
>> something has changed since older versions of NetBackup.
>>
>> regards,
>>
>> Darek
>> ___
>> 
>

___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

This email (including any attachments) may contain confidential and/or
privileged information or information otherwise protected from disclosure.
If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender
immediately, do not copy this message or any attachments and do not use it
for any purpose or disclose its content to any person, but delete this
message and any attachments from your system. Astrium disclaims any and all
liability if this email transmission was virus corrupted, altered or
falsified.
-
Astrium Limited, Registered in England and Wales No. 2449259
REGISTERED OFFICE:-
Gunnels Wood Road, Stevenage, Hertfordshire, SG1 2AS, England

___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size

[Dariusz Klar]

Thanks Simon for your incredible fast response :-) The purpose of my 
question is that I have to plan disk space used by indexes (catalog) for 
NetBackup environment. Estimated size of data under NetBackup protection 
is 110 TB (tera bytes). All I know is that file size in this environment 
is "typical" or "medium in size", whatever it means.

My first estimation was 1% of 110TB, but after I noticed that catalog 
consumes much more space than expected I increased my estimation to 3%.

regards,

Darek

WEAVER, Simon (external) wrote:
> Ok so you do mean the catalog :)
> Im not too sure much has changed, but using the catalog tool, you can
> redirect the catalog images to an alternative location.
>
> Something like this document may help...
>
> http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/269996.htm
>
> Look for the section moving the netbackup image catalog. I do this
> all the time, to free up the default space of its original location :-)
>
> HTH
>
> Simon 
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dariusz
> Klar
> Sent: Friday, March 28, 2008 9:23 AM
> To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
> Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size
>
> I mean /opt/openv/netbackup/db/images.
>
> rgr,
>
> Darek
>
>
>
> WEAVER, Simon (external) wrote:
>   
>> Darek
>> I am certainly no guru, and I have not used 6.5 yet, but what do you 
>> mean by "Index" ? Catalog information?
>> Simon
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of 
>> Dariusz Klar
>> Sent: Friday, March 28, 2008 8:52 AM
>> To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
>> Subject: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size
>>
>> Gurus,
>>
>> Recently I noticed that indexes are consuming a lot of disk space. 
>> Does anyone know the rule, how to plan space for indexes? Looks like 
>> something has changed since older versions of NetBackup.
>>
>> regards,
>>
>> Darek
>> ___
>> 
>

___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size

[WEAVER, Simon (external)]

Ok so you do mean the catalog :)
Im not too sure much has changed, but using the catalog tool, you can
redirect the catalog images to an alternative location.

Something like this document may help...

http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/269996.htm

Look for the section moving the netbackup image catalog. I do this
all the time, to free up the default space of its original location :-)

HTH

Simon 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dariusz
Klar
Sent: Friday, March 28, 2008 9:23 AM
To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size

I mean /opt/openv/netbackup/db/images.

rgr,

Darek



WEAVER, Simon (external) wrote:
> Darek
> I am certainly no guru, and I have not used 6.5 yet, but what do you 
> mean by "Index" ? Catalog information?
> Simon
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of 
> Dariusz Klar
> Sent: Friday, March 28, 2008 8:52 AM
> To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
> Subject: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size
>
> Gurus,
>
> Recently I noticed that indexes are consuming a lot of disk space. 
> Does anyone know the rule, how to plan space for indexes? Looks like 
> something has changed since older versions of NetBackup.
>
> regards,
>
> Darek
> ___
> Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu 
> http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
>
> This email (including any attachments) may contain confidential and/or

> privileged information or information otherwise protected from
disclosure.
> If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender 
> immediately, do not copy this message or any attachments and do not 
> use it for any purpose or disclose its content to any person, but 
> delete this message and any attachments from your system. Astrium 
> disclaims any and all liability if this email transmission was virus 
> corrupted, altered or falsified.
> -
> Astrium Limited, Registered in England and Wales No. 2449259 
> REGISTERED OFFICE:- Gunnels Wood Road, Stevenage, Hertfordshire, SG1 
> 2AS, England
>   

___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

This email (including any attachments) may contain confidential and/or
privileged information or information otherwise protected from disclosure.
If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender
immediately, do not copy this message or any attachments and do not use it
for any purpose or disclose its content to any person, but delete this
message and any attachments from your system. Astrium disclaims any and all
liability if this email transmission was virus corrupted, altered or
falsified.
-
Astrium Limited, Registered in England and Wales No. 2449259
REGISTERED OFFICE:-
Gunnels Wood Road, Stevenage, Hertfordshire, SG1 2AS, England

___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size

[Dariusz Klar]

I mean /opt/openv/netbackup/db/images.

rgr,

Darek



WEAVER, Simon (external) wrote:
> Darek
> I am certainly no guru, and I have not used 6.5 yet, but what do you
> mean by "Index" ? Catalog information?
> Simon 
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dariusz
> Klar
> Sent: Friday, March 28, 2008 8:52 AM
> To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
> Subject: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size
>
> Gurus,
>
> Recently I noticed that indexes are consuming a lot of disk space. Does
> anyone know the rule, how to plan space for indexes? Looks like
> something has changed since older versions of NetBackup.
>
> regards,
>
> Darek
> ___
> Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
> http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
>
> This email (including any attachments) may contain confidential and/or
> privileged information or information otherwise protected from disclosure.
> If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender
> immediately, do not copy this message or any attachments and do not use it
> for any purpose or disclose its content to any person, but delete this
> message and any attachments from your system. Astrium disclaims any and all
> liability if this email transmission was virus corrupted, altered or
> falsified.
> -
> Astrium Limited, Registered in England and Wales No. 2449259
> REGISTERED OFFICE:-
> Gunnels Wood Road, Stevenage, Hertfordshire, SG1 2AS, England
>   

___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size

[WEAVER, Simon (external)]

Darek
I am certainly no guru, and I have not used 6.5 yet, but what do you
mean by "Index" ? Catalog information?
Simon 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dariusz
Klar
Sent: Friday, March 28, 2008 8:52 AM
To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 index size

Gurus,

Recently I noticed that indexes are consuming a lot of disk space. Does
anyone know the rule, how to plan space for indexes? Looks like
something has changed since older versions of NetBackup.

regards,

Darek
___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

This email (including any attachments) may contain confidential and/or
privileged information or information otherwise protected from disclosure.
If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender
immediately, do not copy this message or any attachments and do not use it
for any purpose or disclose its content to any person, but delete this
message and any attachments from your system. Astrium disclaims any and all
liability if this email transmission was virus corrupted, altered or
falsified.
-
Astrium Limited, Registered in England and Wales No. 2449259
REGISTERED OFFICE:-
Gunnels Wood Road, Stevenage, Hertfordshire, SG1 2AS, England

___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 and holding Jobs

[Nardello, John]

http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/278938.htm
 
And no, "nbpemreq -suspend_scheduling" does not carry over across daemon
bounces or reboots. If you want to not have jobs trigger immediately
after those actions, you'll need to either disable your NB startup
script or be really quick with another suspend command. 
 
- John Nardello



From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Holowinski, Scott
Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2008 2:26 PM
To: Len Boyle; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Cc: Kevin Whittaker
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 and holding Jobs



Len,

 

That doesn't appear to be a documented command line switch.  So how do
you turn scheduling back on after using it?

 

Thanks,

 

Scott 



From: Len Boyle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2008 9:32 AM
To: Kevin Whittaker; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 and holding Jobs

 

Kevin, 

 

Try the command

 

nbpemreq -suspend_scheduling

 

len

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin
Whittaker
Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2008 10:59 AM
To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 and holding Jobs

 

Ok, when I was on 5.1 I could change the behavior file to # of tries 0
and rereadconfig to allow NB to be running but no new jobs to kick off.
But I could still submit jobs manually.

When I went to 6.5, VERITAS told me to just stop the bprd daemon.  Well,
with that not running I can not submit jobs manually.

Sometimes, I am working on the master server and bring up netbackup and
don't want any jobs to run. 

Anybody have any ideas on how to do this? 

Kevin Whittaker 
Syniverse Technologies 
Systems Engineer - UNIX Admin 
Work: (813) 637-5502 
Cell: (813) 810-6456 

Privileged/Confidential Information may be contained in this message or
attachments hereto. Please advise immediately if you or your employer do
not consent to Internet email for messages of this kind. Opinions,
conclusions and other information in this message that do not relate to
the official business of this company shall be understood as neither
given nor endorsed by it.

___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 and holding Jobs

[A Darren Dunham]

On Tue, Jan 08, 2008 at 03:25:55PM -0700, Holowinski, Scott wrote:
>> nbpemreq -suspend_scheduling

> That doesn't appear to be a documented command line switch.  So how do
> you turn scheduling back on after using it?

It does appear in a technote.

http://seer.support.veritas.com/docs/278938.htm

-- 
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] NetBackup 6.5 and holding Jobs

[Holowinski, Scott]

Len,

 

That doesn't appear to be a documented command line switch.  So how do
you turn scheduling back on after using it?

 

Thanks,

 

Scott 



From: Len Boyle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2008 9:32 AM
To: Kevin Whittaker; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 and holding Jobs

 

Kevin, 

 

Try the command

 

nbpemreq -suspend_scheduling

 

len

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin
Whittaker
Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2008 10:59 AM
To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 and holding Jobs

 

Ok, when I was on 5.1 I could change the behavior file to # of tries 0
and rereadconfig to allow NB to be running but no new jobs to kick off.
But I could still submit jobs manually.

When I went to 6.5, VERITAS told me to just stop the bprd daemon.  Well,
with that not running I can not submit jobs manually.

Sometimes, I am working on the master server and bring up netbackup and
don't want any jobs to run. 

Anybody have any ideas on how to do this? 

Kevin Whittaker 
Syniverse Technologies 
Systems Engineer - UNIX Admin 
Work: (813) 637-5502 
Cell: (813) 810-6456 


Privileged/Confidential Information may be contained in this message or 
attachments hereto. Please advise immediately if you or your employer do not 
consent to Internet email for messages of this kind. Opinions, conclusions and 
other information in this message that do not relate to the official business 
of this company shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by it.

___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 and holding Jobs

[Len Boyle]

Hello Kevin

If memory serves me, it is no longer suspended.
You can also use the command nbpemreq -resume_scheduling
To restore operations.

In the long term it would be good if netbackup could have a more general 
interface to the scheduling functions.
So one could suspend client schedules, or overhead job, like dups and db 
backups.
Also I do not believe that this command will stop user backups such has rman. 
It would be nice if one could do that also.

len

From: Kevin Whittaker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2008 1:16 PM
To: Len Boyle; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 and holding Jobs

Len,

That worked great, but if I stop and start netbackup will it still be suspended?

Kevin


From: Len Boyle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2008 11:32 AM
To: Kevin Whittaker; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 and holding Jobs
Kevin,

Try the command

nbpemreq -suspend_scheduling

len
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin Whittaker
Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2008 10:59 AM
To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 and holding Jobs


Ok, when I was on 5.1 I could change the behavior file to # of tries 0 and 
rereadconfig to allow NB to be running but no new jobs to kick off.  But I 
could still submit jobs manually.

When I went to 6.5, VERITAS told me to just stop the bprd daemon.  Well, with 
that not running I can not submit jobs manually.

Sometimes, I am working on the master server and bring up netbackup and don't 
want any jobs to run.

Anybody have any ideas on how to do this?

Kevin Whittaker
Syniverse Technologies
Systems Engineer - UNIX Admin
Work: (813) 637-5502
Cell: (813) 810-6456
___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 and holding Jobs

[Kevin Whittaker]

Len,
 
That worked great, but if I stop and start netbackup will it still be
suspended?
 
Kevin



From: Len Boyle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2008 11:32 AM
To: Kevin Whittaker; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 and holding Jobs



Kevin, 

 

Try the command

 

nbpemreq -suspend_scheduling

 

len

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin
Whittaker
Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2008 10:59 AM
To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 and holding Jobs

 

Ok, when I was on 5.1 I could change the behavior file to # of tries 0
and rereadconfig to allow NB to be running but no new jobs to kick off.
But I could still submit jobs manually.

When I went to 6.5, VERITAS told me to just stop the bprd daemon.  Well,
with that not running I can not submit jobs manually.

Sometimes, I am working on the master server and bring up netbackup and
don't want any jobs to run. 

Anybody have any ideas on how to do this? 

Kevin Whittaker 
Syniverse Technologies 
Systems Engineer - UNIX Admin 
Work: (813) 637-5502 
Cell: (813) 810-6456 
___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 and holding Jobs

[Len Boyle]

Kevin,

Try the command

nbpemreq -suspend_scheduling

len
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin Whittaker
Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2008 10:59 AM
To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 and holding Jobs


Ok, when I was on 5.1 I could change the behavior file to # of tries 0 and 
rereadconfig to allow NB to be running but no new jobs to kick off.  But I 
could still submit jobs manually.

When I went to 6.5, VERITAS told me to just stop the bprd daemon.  Well, with 
that not running I can not submit jobs manually.

Sometimes, I am working on the master server and bring up netbackup and don't 
want any jobs to run.

Anybody have any ideas on how to do this?

Kevin Whittaker
Syniverse Technologies
Systems Engineer - UNIX Admin
Work: (813) 637-5502
Cell: (813) 810-6456
___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 - disk staging Units

[rcarlisle]

Adam,

Nope you're right which reminds why I don't usually respond to these things
when I have been up all night working support issues and haven't had my
first cup of coffee yet!  I was thinking too literal.  Yes, you could easily
do that. 


 
 
Reneé Carlisle 
ServerWare Corporation
-Original Message-
From: Mellor, Adam A. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 7:48 AM
To: rcarlisle; Curtis Preston; Kevin Whittaker;
VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 - disk staging Units

I'm not yes seeing this as a problem,

Doesn't netbackup Storage units consider all available drives, of a
particular density eg HCART2, for the library eg ACS 0, that are configured
in netbackup say 10 of them, fair game for any storage unit.

if the storage unit "staging_A" is configured for a maximum of 4 drives then
that's all it can use,
If the storage unit "backups_C" is configured for a maximum of 10 drives,
then it will use all of the drives.

Should the priority configured for staging (9 by default isnt it?) mean
that it gets it's 4 drives when needed and backups can use them when not ?

Adam.

-Original Message-
From: rcarlisle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, 18 October 2007 7:36 PM
To: 'Curtis Preston'; 'Kevin Whittaker'; Mellor, Adam A.;
VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 - disk staging Units

 I can think of an issue.  When you create a storage unit, you need to
define what drives are in it.  Let's say I have a tape library with 10
drives, but I only want to use 4 of them for disk staging.  If I create a
storage unit, I am limited to those four physical drives.  If I want to
leave those drives also available for backups - storage unit with 10 drives
in it- A backup may pick on of my staging unit drives, and now I am limited
to three drives even though there may be available drives in the library,
just not defined in that particular storage unit.  The touch file allowed
for greater flexibility for staging to pick any four of the ten drives
available.


 
 
Reneé Carlisle
ServerWare Corporation






-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Curtis
Preston
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 4:07 AM
To: Kevin Whittaker; Mellor, Adam A.; VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 - disk staging Units

What's wrong with creating an additional storage unit?

---
W. Curtis Preston
Backup Blog @ www.backupcentral.com
VP Data Protection, GlassHouse Technologies 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin
Whittaker
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 7:47 AM
To: Mellor, Adam A.; VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 - disk staging Units

I am scheduled to upgrade from 5.1 to 6.5 and would be very interested
in the answer to this question.  I checked the documentation and in the
Veritas NetBackup 6.5 Admin Guide for UNIX and Linux Vol 1 had the
answer... I think

On page 250:  It says that the final destination storage unit will
control the "maximum concurrent write drives".  That explanation was on
page 231.

This is not good!  I do not want to have to create a new storage unit to
control the # of drives that the copy from disk to tape will use.

Has anybody found out anything more on this issue?

Kevin 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mellor,
Adam A.
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 7:32 AM
To: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 - disk staging Units

Good evening,

I have another NBU 6.5 Question,

I have just completed my 5.1 to 6.5 upgrade, no real drama's with the
upgrade.

I am monitoring the progress of the scheduled backups to see how much
carnage there is.

My disk staging units are using all of the available tape drives,
previously in NBU 5.1 I was able to limit this using the
MAX_STAGING_JOBS touchfile.

Is there some way to limit the number of jobs for de-staging disk
backups in 6.5 ?

Thanks,

Back to monitoring logs...

Adam Mellor
Senior Unix Support Analyst
CF IT TECHNOLOGY SERVICES
Woodside Energy Ltd.

NOTICE: This email and any attachments are confidential. 
They may contain legally privileged information or copyright material.
You must not read, copy, use or disclose them without authorisation. If
you are not an intended recipient, please contact us at once by return
email and then delete both messages and all attachments.

___
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/lis

Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 - disk staging Units

[Mellor, Adam A.]

I'm not yes seeing this as a problem,

Doesn't netbackup Storage units consider all available drives, of a particular 
density eg HCART2, for the library eg ACS 0, that are configured in netbackup 
say 10 of them, fair game for any storage unit.

if the storage unit "staging_A" is configured for a maximum of 4 drives then 
that's all it can use,
If the storage unit "backups_C" is configured for a maximum of 10 drives, then 
it will use all of the drives.

Should the priority configured for staging (9 by default isnt it?) mean 
that it gets it's 4 drives when needed and backups can use them when not ?

Adam.

-Original Message-
From: rcarlisle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, 18 October 2007 7:36 PM
To: 'Curtis Preston'; 'Kevin Whittaker'; Mellor, Adam A.; 
VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 - disk staging Units

 I can think of an issue.  When you create a storage unit, you need to define 
what drives are in it.  Let's say I have a tape library with 10 drives, but I 
only want to use 4 of them for disk staging.  If I create a storage unit, I am 
limited to those four physical drives.  If I want to leave those drives also 
available for backups - storage unit with 10 drives in it- A backup may pick on 
of my staging unit drives, and now I am limited to three drives even though 
there may be available drives in the library, just not defined in that 
particular storage unit.  The touch file allowed for greater flexibility for 
staging to pick any four of the ten drives available.


 
 
Reneé Carlisle
ServerWare Corporation






-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Curtis
Preston
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 4:07 AM
To: Kevin Whittaker; Mellor, Adam A.; VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 - disk staging Units

What's wrong with creating an additional storage unit?

---
W. Curtis Preston
Backup Blog @ www.backupcentral.com
VP Data Protection, GlassHouse Technologies 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin
Whittaker
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 7:47 AM
To: Mellor, Adam A.; VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 - disk staging Units

I am scheduled to upgrade from 5.1 to 6.5 and would be very interested
in the answer to this question.  I checked the documentation and in the
Veritas NetBackup 6.5 Admin Guide for UNIX and Linux Vol 1 had the
answer... I think

On page 250:  It says that the final destination storage unit will
control the "maximum concurrent write drives".  That explanation was on
page 231.

This is not good!  I do not want to have to create a new storage unit to
control the # of drives that the copy from disk to tape will use.

Has anybody found out anything more on this issue?

Kevin 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mellor,
Adam A.
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 7:32 AM
To: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 - disk staging Units

Good evening,

I have another NBU 6.5 Question,

I have just completed my 5.1 to 6.5 upgrade, no real drama's with the
upgrade.

I am monitoring the progress of the scheduled backups to see how much
carnage there is.

My disk staging units are using all of the available tape drives,
previously in NBU 5.1 I was able to limit this using the
MAX_STAGING_JOBS touchfile.

Is there some way to limit the number of jobs for de-staging disk
backups in 6.5 ?

Thanks,

Back to monitoring logs...

Adam Mellor
Senior Unix Support Analyst
CF IT TECHNOLOGY SERVICES
Woodside Energy Ltd.

NOTICE: This email and any attachments are confidential. 
They may contain legally privileged information or copyright material.
You must not read, copy, use or disclose them without authorisation. If
you are not an intended recipient, please contact us at once by return
email and then delete both messages and all attachments.

___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu


___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

NOTICE: This email and any attachments are confidential. 
They may contain legally privileged information or 
copyright material. You must not read, copy, use or 
disclose them without authorisation. If you are not an 
intended recipient, please contact us at once by return 
email and then delete both messages and all attachments.

_

Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 - disk staging Units

[rcarlisle]

 I can think of an issue.  When you create a storage unit, you need to
define what drives are in it.  Let's say I have a tape library with 10
drives, but I only want to use 4 of them for disk staging.  If I create a
storage unit, I am limited to those four physical drives.  If I want to
leave those drives also available for backups - storage unit with 10 drives
in it- A backup may pick on of my staging unit drives, and now I am limited
to three drives even though there may be available drives in the library,
just not defined in that particular storage unit.  The touch file allowed
for greater flexibility for staging to pick any four of the ten drives
available.


 
 
Reneé Carlisle 
ServerWare Corporation






-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Curtis
Preston
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 4:07 AM
To: Kevin Whittaker; Mellor, Adam A.; VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 - disk staging Units

What's wrong with creating an additional storage unit?

---
W. Curtis Preston
Backup Blog @ www.backupcentral.com
VP Data Protection, GlassHouse Technologies 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin
Whittaker
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 7:47 AM
To: Mellor, Adam A.; VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 - disk staging Units

I am scheduled to upgrade from 5.1 to 6.5 and would be very interested
in the answer to this question.  I checked the documentation and in the
Veritas NetBackup 6.5 Admin Guide for UNIX and Linux Vol 1 had the
answer... I think

On page 250:  It says that the final destination storage unit will
control the "maximum concurrent write drives".  That explanation was on
page 231.

This is not good!  I do not want to have to create a new storage unit to
control the # of drives that the copy from disk to tape will use.

Has anybody found out anything more on this issue?

Kevin 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mellor,
Adam A.
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 7:32 AM
To: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 - disk staging Units

Good evening,

I have another NBU 6.5 Question,

I have just completed my 5.1 to 6.5 upgrade, no real drama's with the
upgrade.

I am monitoring the progress of the scheduled backups to see how much
carnage there is.

My disk staging units are using all of the available tape drives,
previously in NBU 5.1 I was able to limit this using the
MAX_STAGING_JOBS touchfile.

Is there some way to limit the number of jobs for de-staging disk
backups in 6.5 ?

Thanks,

Back to monitoring logs...

Adam Mellor
Senior Unix Support Analyst
CF IT TECHNOLOGY SERVICES
Woodside Energy Ltd.

NOTICE: This email and any attachments are confidential. 
They may contain legally privileged information or copyright material.
You must not read, copy, use or disclose them without authorisation. If
you are not an intended recipient, please contact us at once by return
email and then delete both messages and all attachments.

___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu


___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu



___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 - disk staging Units

[Kevin Whittaker]

I change the # of drives over the weekend.  On Saturday nights, I change
the MAX_STAGING_DRIVES from 2 to 5, if vaulting is almost done and there
is enough drives available.  Then after it starts I change it right
back.  I am concerned that have to deal with a storage unit will cause
issues with being required to cycle netbackup after changing the storage
unit.

Kevin 

-Original Message-
From: Curtis Preston [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 4:07 AM
To: Kevin Whittaker; Mellor, Adam A.; VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 - disk staging Units

What's wrong with creating an additional storage unit?

---
W. Curtis Preston
Backup Blog @ www.backupcentral.com
VP Data Protection, GlassHouse Technologies 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin
Whittaker
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 7:47 AM
To: Mellor, Adam A.; VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 - disk staging Units

I am scheduled to upgrade from 5.1 to 6.5 and would be very interested
in the answer to this question.  I checked the documentation and in the
Veritas NetBackup 6.5 Admin Guide for UNIX and Linux Vol 1 had the
answer... I think

On page 250:  It says that the final destination storage unit will
control the "maximum concurrent write drives".  That explanation was on
page 231.

This is not good!  I do not want to have to create a new storage unit to
control the # of drives that the copy from disk to tape will use.

Has anybody found out anything more on this issue?

Kevin 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mellor,
Adam A.
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 7:32 AM
To: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 - disk staging Units

Good evening,

I have another NBU 6.5 Question,

I have just completed my 5.1 to 6.5 upgrade, no real drama's with the
upgrade.

I am monitoring the progress of the scheduled backups to see how much
carnage there is.

My disk staging units are using all of the available tape drives,
previously in NBU 5.1 I was able to limit this using the
MAX_STAGING_JOBS touchfile.

Is there some way to limit the number of jobs for de-staging disk
backups in 6.5 ?

Thanks,

Back to monitoring logs...

Adam Mellor
Senior Unix Support Analyst
CF IT TECHNOLOGY SERVICES
Woodside Energy Ltd.

NOTICE: This email and any attachments are confidential. 
They may contain legally privileged information or copyright material.
You must not read, copy, use or disclose them without authorisation. If
you are not an intended recipient, please contact us at once by return
email and then delete both messages and all attachments.

___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu


___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu


___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 - disk staging Units

[Mellor, Adam A.]

Hello,

This is something I will be configuring ... Soon ...

Small changes to the environment at the moment, just upgraded and got an
un-expected DSU issue to clean first.

Adam.

-Original Message-
From: Curtis Preston [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, 18 October 2007 4:07 PM
To: Kevin Whittaker; Mellor, Adam A.; VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 - disk staging Units

What's wrong with creating an additional storage unit?

---
W. Curtis Preston
Backup Blog @ www.backupcentral.com
VP Data Protection, GlassHouse Technologies 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin
Whittaker
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 7:47 AM
To: Mellor, Adam A.; VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 - disk staging Units

I am scheduled to upgrade from 5.1 to 6.5 and would be very interested
in the answer to this question.  I checked the documentation and in the
Veritas NetBackup 6.5 Admin Guide for UNIX and Linux Vol 1 had the
answer... I think

On page 250:  It says that the final destination storage unit will
control the "maximum concurrent write drives".  That explanation was on
page 231.

This is not good!  I do not want to have to create a new storage unit to
control the # of drives that the copy from disk to tape will use.

Has anybody found out anything more on this issue?

Kevin 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mellor,
Adam A.
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 7:32 AM
To: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 - disk staging Units

Good evening,

I have another NBU 6.5 Question,

I have just completed my 5.1 to 6.5 upgrade, no real drama's with the
upgrade.

I am monitoring the progress of the scheduled backups to see how much
carnage there is.

My disk staging units are using all of the available tape drives,
previously in NBU 5.1 I was able to limit this using the
MAX_STAGING_JOBS touchfile.

Is there some way to limit the number of jobs for de-staging disk
backups in 6.5 ?

Thanks,

Back to monitoring logs...

Adam Mellor
Senior Unix Support Analyst
CF IT TECHNOLOGY SERVICES
Woodside Energy Ltd.

NOTICE: This email and any attachments are confidential. 
They may contain legally privileged information or copyright material.
You must not read, copy, use or disclose them without authorisation. If
you are not an intended recipient, please contact us at once by return
email and then delete both messages and all attachments.

___
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

NOTICE: This email and any attachments are confidential. 
They may contain legally privileged information or 
copyright material. You must not read, copy, use or 
disclose them without authorisation. If you are not an 
intended recipient, please contact us at once by return 
email and then delete both messages and all attachments.

___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 - disk staging Units

[Curtis Preston]

What's wrong with creating an additional storage unit?

---
W. Curtis Preston
Backup Blog @ www.backupcentral.com
VP Data Protection, GlassHouse Technologies 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin
Whittaker
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 7:47 AM
To: Mellor, Adam A.; VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 - disk staging Units

I am scheduled to upgrade from 5.1 to 6.5 and would be very interested
in the answer to this question.  I checked the documentation and in the
Veritas NetBackup 6.5 Admin Guide for UNIX and Linux Vol 1 had the
answer... I think

On page 250:  It says that the final destination storage unit will
control the "maximum concurrent write drives".  That explanation was on
page 231.

This is not good!  I do not want to have to create a new storage unit to
control the # of drives that the copy from disk to tape will use.

Has anybody found out anything more on this issue?

Kevin 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mellor,
Adam A.
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 7:32 AM
To: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 - disk staging Units

Good evening,

I have another NBU 6.5 Question,

I have just completed my 5.1 to 6.5 upgrade, no real drama's with the
upgrade.

I am monitoring the progress of the scheduled backups to see how much
carnage there is.

My disk staging units are using all of the available tape drives,
previously in NBU 5.1 I was able to limit this using the
MAX_STAGING_JOBS touchfile.

Is there some way to limit the number of jobs for de-staging disk
backups in 6.5 ?

Thanks,

Back to monitoring logs...

Adam Mellor
Senior Unix Support Analyst
CF IT TECHNOLOGY SERVICES
Woodside Energy Ltd.

NOTICE: This email and any attachments are confidential. 
They may contain legally privileged information or copyright material.
You must not read, copy, use or disclose them without authorisation. If
you are not an intended recipient, please contact us at once by return
email and then delete both messages and all attachments.

___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu


___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 for VMware - Failed to get VM ServerInfo List

[Boris Kraizman]

Hi Karen,

What about a support for Domino Notes 8.0 in NB 6.5?

Thank you,
Boris

On 10/17/07, Karen Schoenbauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Use the command line to add your clients for now.  In NB 6.5.1, you will
> be able to add a client using the GUI without getting them from the
> virtualcenter.   In NB 6.5.1, NetBackup is making changes to workaround
> a slow vmware response time to the virtualcenters.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of emapola
> Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2007 2:49 PM
> To: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
> Subject: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 for VMware - Failed to get VM
> ServerInfo List
>
>
> Hi,
>
> this afternoon tech guys  told me to increase gui timeout to 400.
>
> It didn't work, after that i try to increase it to 500 ("bpdown" and
> "bpup") and finally it work.
>
> With 500 of timeout i'm able to query my vm machine into virtualcenter
> and add it to the policy.
>
> Just after close the policy and wait untill the autocheck feature finish
> i've tried to reopen the policy and add anothe vm machine, it didin't
> work and say me "failed to get vm ..".
> Close nbu gui, reopen it and retry and it work.
>
> I was able to reproduce this error 4 times.
>
> Any suggestion?
>
> +--
> |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central.
> |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> +--
>
>
> ___
> Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
> http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
>
> ___
> Veritas-bu 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] NetBackup 6.5 and Exchange 2007

[Ambrose, Monte]

Note that there will be a solution for NBU 6.0 MP5+  It is a patch that 
engineering is working on and you can get it if you get your sale rep to have 
it released to you.  We have tested 6.0 MP5+ and 6.5 and both versions work for 
backup.  Restore with recovery (mount and commit) to the original Storage Group 
fails for both 6.0 and 6.5.  You can get the restore/recovery to work if you do 
it to a recovery storage group or if you do a restore and manualy do recovery 
via Exchange.  Symantec knows of this bug and is working with Microsoft to 
resolve it.

Monte

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Cruice, Daniel 
(US - Glen Mills)
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2007 10:52 AM
To: Rajmund Siwik; VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 and Exchange 2007

You will need to go to 6.5 if you plan to backup the Storage groups via NBU, MS 
changed the database layout, now as to how to:...not quite sure, however what 
we have been doing to get around this in the meantime is creating a ntbackup 
job (assuming you have enough space) and backing up the SG locally, then having 
NBU back that up to tape.  You can use task scheduler to perform the NTbackup.  
I'm sure there are somewhite papers on how to...

Thanks
Dan
From: Rajmund Siwik [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2007 12:55 PM
To: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.5 and Exchange 2007

Hi All,

My Exchange guy is pushing to upgrade his EX to 2007 and I have to provide a 
solution. Currently we have NBU 6.5MP4 so I need to go to 6.5.
Has anybody tried it and can share some thoughts, problems, gotchas?

TIA

--Rajmund


Conexant E-mail Firewall (Conexant.Com) made the following annotations
-
** Legal Disclaimer  "This 
email may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of the 
intended recipient. Any unauthorized review, use or distribution by others is 
strictly prohibited. If you have received the message in error, please advise 
the sender by reply email and delete the message. Thank you." 
** 
-

This message (including any attachments) contains confidential information 
intended for a specific individual and purpose, and is protected by law. If you 
are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message and are hereby 
notified that any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message, or the 
taking of any action based on it, is strictly prohibited.
___
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 - disk staging Units

[Kevin Whittaker]

I am scheduled to upgrade from 5.1 to 6.5 and would be very interested
in the answer to this question.  I checked the documentation and in the
Veritas NetBackup 6.5 Admin Guide for UNIX and Linux Vol 1 had the
answer... I think

On page 250:  It says that the final destination storage unit will
control the "maximum concurrent write drives".  That explanation was on
page 231.

This is not good!  I do not want to have to create a new storage unit to
control the # of drives that the copy from disk to tape will use.

Has anybody found out anything more on this issue?

Kevin 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mellor,
Adam A.
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 7:32 AM
To: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.5 - disk staging Units

Good evening,

I have another NBU 6.5 Question,

I have just completed my 5.1 to 6.5 upgrade, no real drama's with the
upgrade.

I am monitoring the progress of the scheduled backups to see how much
carnage there is.

My disk staging units are using all of the available tape drives,
previously in NBU 5.1 I was able to limit this using the
MAX_STAGING_JOBS touchfile.

Is there some way to limit the number of jobs for de-staging disk
backups in 6.5 ?

Thanks,

Back to monitoring logs...

Adam Mellor
Senior Unix Support Analyst
CF IT TECHNOLOGY SERVICES
Woodside Energy Ltd.

NOTICE: This email and any attachments are confidential. 
They may contain legally privileged information or copyright material.
You must not read, copy, use or disclose them without authorisation. If
you are not an intended recipient, please contact us at once by return
email and then delete both messages and all attachments.

___
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