Re: [Veritas-bu] Puredisk experiences ?

That sounds good except the pricing part. Monte, I don't know enough about it yet to have specific questions Michael 2009/4/24 Tristan Ball > I’d second both of these points, but especially the pricing one. When we > looked at it, pricing was based on the volume of data pre-deduplication, and

Re: [Veritas-bu] MSEO - How to understand the images are

Hi Bob, Thanks for reply. We have to show them to the Audit team, you know. We can't show the logs, it doesn't make sense them, right. There should be another way; from GUI or by command.. Thanks. Servet -Original Message- From: veritas-bu-boun...@mailman.eng.auburn.edu [mailto:verit

Re: [Veritas-bu] Puredisk experiences ?

I'd second both of these points, but especially the pricing one. When we looked at it, pricing was based on the volume of data pre-deduplication, and bought in blocks of n Gigabytes or Terabytes. I had two big issues with that 1) From a business point of view the one of the big value

Re: [Veritas-bu] Puredisk experiences ?

0n Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 11:26:20AM -0500, Ed Wilts wrote: >That said, we really like PureDisk technically. We still don't like the >price... Well this is the confusing part. I thought as of NBU 6.5 PureDisk was dundled in for free ? -aW IMPORTANT: This email remains the propert

[Veritas-bu] FW: Corrupt header files

Forgot to mention: run the script when no backups or restores are in progress. Neil -- Forwarded Message From: "Conner, Neil" Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 16:55:19 -0700 To: Veritas List Conversation: Corrupt header files Subject: [Veritas-bu] Corrupt header files Netbackup 6.0 MP5 on Solaris 10.

[Veritas-bu] Corrupt header files

Netbackup 6.0 MP5 on Solaris 10. I was working with support and they had me edit some header files and I happened to stumble upon one that had some corruption in it: I got the following error when I opened it with vi: "client_1212199228_FULL" [Incomplete last line] I found that an extra line of

Re: [Veritas-bu] Decru Dataforts

Yes, I can confirm that I've seen that fairly frequently too, but I don't have a repeatability case so I haven't done much in the way of scientific testing to track it down. In loose terms, one or both of the host or the tape drive, though logged into the fabric, no longer appear to be so from

Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup Master server hardware - Solaris

Is that Oracle T2000’s? J Regards, Patrick Whelan VERITAS Certified NetBackup Support Engineer for UNIX. VERITAS Certified NetBackup Support Engineer for Windows. netbac...@whelan-consulting.co.uk cid:image001.gif@01C99E80.E2717A6

Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup Master server hardware - Solaris

T2000's also work well as media and master servers. 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 p

[Veritas-bu] Catalog Backup Question

FYI we are running NB 6.5. (couldn't edit my post) Thanks. T +-- |This was sent by tim.minni...@prometric.com via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to ab...@backupcentral.com. +-

[Veritas-bu] Catalog Backup Question

Good afternoon, we are running an environment where we have an E4500 master and 2 V490 media servers. We are using an L700 and LTO drives. All fiber attached via Brocade switch. Every morning we run a differential catalog backup that goes offsite with tapes. In the early afternoon we run a

Re: [Veritas-bu] Need Information about Catalog Backup and DR exercise

Is your DR master a working master without needing the catalog recovered into it? On your DR master ( must be a working master ) Make a dir Prodimages some please. Copy from your prod master /usr/openv/netbackup/db/images/ to the Prodimages on your DR master. On your DR master create a link /us

[Veritas-bu] Inline Tape Copy vs Storage Unit Groups (and other ITC wierdness)

If I create a policy that uses inline-tape-copy to make an offsite copy, I see two pieces of wierdness that I don't understand. The first is that if I select a storage unit group for my destination, the tape pool, tape owner, etc. grays out. It's not like my tape pools are tied to a specific se

[Veritas-bu] Need Information about Catalog Backup and DR exercise

We have an Enterprise Backup Solution (EBS) that has one master server and five media servers and let's say 100 clients. We want to be able to just pull a DR exercise on one of the clients. We run a catalog backup on the master and that is it. Well if we do the exercise we will have to to a c

Re: [Veritas-bu] Decru Dataforts

We are currently using Decru Dataforts. We found that there is a configuration setting to have them run in "HP Mode" that allows them to work between HP media servers and tape drives. HP Mode = LUN mapped / HPUX LAM presentation Solaris Mode = port mapped / mixed mode presentation Unfortunatel

Re: [Veritas-bu] Puredisk experiences ?

On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 2:57 AM, Michael Graff Andersen wrote: > > We are considering Puredisk for our remote offices and would like to hear > other users experiences with it > PureDisk is great for backups but you have to have a serious look at your restore requirements. For example, if you hav

Re: [Veritas-bu] Puredisk experiences ?

Michael We are using it to backup a few hundred clients across the world. Probably about 10 different countries. First backup can take a while but it's all incremental after that and it seems to work pretty well. It also has an aggressive integration path with NetBackup that I like. Let me

[Veritas-bu] VCB

Hi All, I have few questions with regards to VCB backup 1. The document says that an Incremental/Differential backup can be achieved only by selecting option 3 under snapshot options which is only folder/file level backups for incremental/differential backups. Is there a way to achieve snapshot (

[Veritas-bu] Netbackup order of ndm -volumes

Hello everyone, I would like to know if there is a way to force netbackup to take ndmp -volumes in certain order. We have noticed that netbackup doesn't always use the order of which we have listed the volumes in the backup selection -part of the policy configuration. This is bit annoying at t