Hi
My guess is - try it. If not, you will probably find that it will not work,
and most likely a release or patch is needed to make it work (as with most
software vendors today).
Check the Symantec Sote for Vista updates - gut feeling says not at the
moment! Gut feeling says patch is more
I'm currently running NetBackup 5.1 MP5 on W2K3. I have one master
server with Hp MSL 6060 Robotic Tape Library. I have no media servers. I
currently backup from about 32 windows servers and Oracle DB's. I am
planning to upgrade to NetBackup 6.0 very soon do to addition of new Red
Hat Linux 4.0
Check your exclude/include list for the month end policy. If you try to
include a drive that does not exist, you get the 71. I have also gotten them
when trying to exclude a windows drive that does not exist.
This would also explain why it is not getting the 71's in another policy.
Bobby.
On Mon, 5 Feb 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Guru's
I am running Netbackup 5.1 MP5 on Solaris 9.0 machine. I have one
clinet running Solaris 10 and i am unable to configure it on backup,
Everytime backup is failing with error 59.
Checked the configuration file and the network
Justin ,
Entry is already there, checked
Regards,
Abhishek Dhingra
Storage and Backup Administration
Justin Piszcz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
02/05/2007 08:19 AM
To
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc
veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject
Re: [Veritas-bu] Solaris 10 client
On Mon, 5 Feb 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Justin ,
Entry is already there, checked
Regards,
Abhishek Dhingra
Storage and Backup Administration
Justin Piszcz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
02/05/2007 08:19 AM
To
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc
When you do an eject, you have to retrieve the tapes from the CAP before
you click done or OK or whatever it is at the end.
If the robot finds the tapes still in the CAP when you click done,
then it aborts and puts the tapes back in the cells.
Paul
--
-Original Message-
Hi all,
I am interested to find out how many persons that are administrating larger
backup environments.
We have one major site with 1 master and 5 media servers which have about
200 clients (hp-ux, solaris, linux, netware, windows) and over 100 database
agents (oracle and Informix). We
who? Symantec or Aptare?
--
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: February 2, 2007 5:59 PM
Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NB 6.0 Aptare
aptare.
Paul Keating [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
02/05/2007 12:23 PM
To
NB List Mail veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
cc
Subject
Re: [Veritas-bu] NB 6.0 Aptare
who? Symantec or Aptare?
--
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL
Had the same issue with NBU 5.1,MP5 and SOlaris 10
turned out to be a DNS issue
try running the following:
bpclntcmd is a useful utility that can be run from any Client. It will
help determine if name
resolution is working properly from NetBackup's perspective.
UNIX command location:
Greetings,
I'm running 5.1 mp4 in a hpux environment. I have a master and 6 SAN
media server systems. When I tried to do a restore of a large file
system on a media server this past weekend, the job failed with status
code 10. The master server has the catalog database and the restore was
I believe the memory is for the media server itself assuming the tape
mounted there. The master would presumably only need enough memory to
issue commands - it is the actual data handling of the tape restore
eating up memory.
Was the tape originally backed up on the media server you're trying
Left out: HP-UX has kernel parameters (swapchunks, maxswchunks...)
that control how large swap can get. If you exceed the amount of swap
these kernel parameters allow for it will just allocate the amount of
swap it can and won't give much complaint. You may want to check to
see if you have
On 2/5/2007 7:54 AM, Preston, Douglas L wrote:
Does one of the other clients in this policy have U: ?
I found that when I have multile clients in a policy and the drive
letters of all clients in the policy do not match I get the same error.
Same thing for multiple clients when you specify
When is (or when did) Veritas going to end of life version 4.5 of NBU?
Regards,
Andy Skates
___
Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Is this a cluster with alternating nodes?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Jeff Lightner
Sent: Mon 2/5/2007 1:29 PM
To: Jeff Cleverley; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Allocation failed error
Left out: HP-UX has kernel parameters
1)Restores are always done from the primary copy.
2)Assuming your example still holds true, if the current primary copy is
removed (as in exported/vaulted, damaged, lost, etc.), you will need to
promote another copy to primary for restores to work. Unless you mean
that the existing primary has
Hi Ed
Yes we done this prior to posting on the list - everything is up to the same
standard as all the other clients.
There is also nothing unusual about the client. And as mentioned, the client
can safely get backed up in any other policy - but complains of a U:\ Drive
and created a status 71 in
19 matches
Mail list logo
