What generation and model is the server - DL is just the make, still need the model and year. :)
Thanks, Brian Desmond [EMAIL PROTECTED] c - 312.731.3132 > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:ActiveDir- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Albert Duro > Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2006 3:51 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] OT - USB HD no boot > > Nothing doing. I tried it on a 3-year old Proliant DL. I couldn't > find any > USB settings, not in the boot order, not in the boot selections, not > anywhere. It's back to the old switch and bai...er...boot > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Albert Duro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Friday, November 03, 2006 7:14 PM > Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] OT - Backup Follies > > > > That's a great revelation. Thank you. I'll try it first thing in > the > > morning. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Laura A. Robinson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[email protected]> > > Sent: Friday, November 03, 2006 2:25 PM > > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT - Backup Follies > > > > > >> Remember when I asked about the BIOS? :-) > >> > >> http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/device/storage/usb-boot.mspx > >> > >> You can check out the links at the end for more information, but > again, > >> this > >> is set in the BIOS of the machine. > >> > >> Laura > >> > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bob > Anderson > >>> Sent: Friday, November 03, 2006 4:03 PM > >>> To: [email protected] > >>> Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT - Backup Follies > >>> > >>> Susan, > >>> How did you do that I would love to be able to reboot > >>> with a worry. > >>> > >>> > >>> Bob > >>> IT Guy > >>> > >>> > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > >>> Susan Bradley, > >>> CPA aka Ebitz - SBS Rocks [MVP] > >>> Sent: Friday, November 03, 2006 3:04 PM > >>> To: [email protected] > >>> Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] OT - Backup Follies > >>> > >>> And on my DC I removed the USB drive as a boot device. > >>> > >>> So now I can be at home in my jammies and remotely reboot the > server > >>> with no issues and it will reboot just fine. > >>> > >>> Bob Anderson wrote: > >>> > Laura, > >>> > Yea that on bit me big time. Had our Domain Controller running > >>> and > >>> > added a USB Drive all was fine. Along came Microsoft with > >>> the darned > >>> > Updates and there 'Computer Must be restarted' Well it restarted > >>> > alright and would not reboot. Talked to IBM Server Support for 4 > >>> > hours be for I finally figured it out myself. That was the > >>> only time > >>> > I ever taught something to them and not the other way around. > >>> > > >>> > I have since update the restart procedure to say 'Power off the > USB > >>> > drive before the system restarts.' > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > Bob > >>> > IT Guy > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > -----Original Message----- > >>> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Laura A. > >>> > Robinson > >>> > Sent: Friday, November 03, 2006 11:41 AM > >>> > To: [email protected] > >>> > Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT - Backup Follies > >>> > > >>> > Umm, that was kinda the point I was trying to make, Bob. :-) > >>> > > >>> > Laura > >>> > > >>> > > >>> >> -----Original Message----- > >>> >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > >>> Bob Anderson > >>> >> Sent: Friday, November 03, 2006 11:09 AM > >>> >> To: [email protected] > >>> >> Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT - Backup Follies > >>> >> > >>> >> Laura, > >>> >> It doesn't matter what the boot order is. Most servers have an > >>> >> internal Raid configuration that doesn't kick in until after the > >>> >> machine goes through it's start up and by them it has > >>> found the USB > >>> >> and not the hard disks. > >>> >> > >>> >> And yes I have this on two of my servers. > >>> >> > >>> >> Bob Anderson > >>> >> IT Guy > >>> >> Kent Sporting Goods > >>> >> 433 Park Ave. S > >>> >> New London OH 44851 > >>> >> 419-929-7021 x315 > >>> >> email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> -----Original Message----- > >>> >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Laura > A. > >>> >> Robinson > >>> >> Sent: Friday, November 03, 2006 10:52 AM > >>> >> To: [email protected] > >>> >> Subject: RE: [ActiveDir] OT - Backup Follies > >>> >> > >>> >> What's the boot order in the BIOS on those machines? > >>> >> > >>> >> Laura > >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> >>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > >>> Albert Duro > >>> >>> Sent: Friday, November 03, 2006 10:54 AM > >>> >>> To: [email protected] > >>> >>> Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] OT - Backup Follies > >>> >>> > >>> >>> Ah, that brings up another interesting point. I use USB > >>> >>> > >>> >> external hard > >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >>> drives too, and I've found that some WinXP and > >>> >>> Server2003 machines will not boot if a USB hard drive is > >>> >>> > >>> >> attached--I > >>> >> > >>> >>> have to remember to turn it off while booting. > >>> >>> Anyone else seen this? > >>> >>> > >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- > >>> >>> From: "Susan Bradley, CPA aka Ebitz - SBS Rocks [MVP]" > >>> >>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>> >>> To: <[email protected]> > >>> >>> Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2006 9:02 PM > >>> >>> Subject: Re: [ActiveDir] OT - Backup Follies (was) Exchange > >>> >>> > >>> >> Log files > >>> >> > >>> >>> --Disk > >>> >>> Full-- > >>> >>> > >>> >>> > >>> >>> > >>> >>>> No tape drives here. If it has a USB connection we are > >>> >>>> > >>> >> in business. > >>> >> > >>> >>>> Albert Duro wrote: > >>> >>>> > >>> >>>>> Yes, BE does do disk backup. But I have some objections: > >>> >>>>> A. They don't make it easy, infact they make an > unnecessarily > >>> >>>>> complicated production of it. > >>> >>>>> B. I started doing NTBackup to disk while (and because) > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> I was still > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> troubleshooting BE. When I gave up on BE and its > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> brethren, NTBackup > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> was a natural segway, and already in place and working. > >>> >>>>> C. I discovered one great advantage that > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> NTBackup-to-disk has over > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> any other backup system: with a bit of planning, it is > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> proof against > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> almost any combination of crash and burn. You have a > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> backup file on > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> two or more disks/machines. Things go bad, you can do > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> recovery from > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> any Windows machine; you can move or copy the backup > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> disks/files to > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> any machine. Try doing that with a sophisticated tape-based > or > >>> >>>>> SAN-based system. Imagine having to replace the tape > >>> >>>>> drive/autoloader with the exact same type, while rebuilding a > >>> >>>>> same-hardware three-year old server to the exact same > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> configuration, > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> same SPs, same backup software, same drivers. I can > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> guarantee that > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> at least one of those necessary replacement elements will be > >>> >>>>> impossible to find, even under leisurely conditions. [1] > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> Yes, there > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> are strategies to deal with that, but if you could spend > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> that kind of > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> money, you would have gotten a double-redundant > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> bullet-proof system in the first place. > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> I truly hope that I'm wrong out of lack of knowledge and > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> pessimism. > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> I am open to being corrected and encouraged. > >>> >>>>> [1] Naturally, the tape drive drivers will be on the same > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> tape that > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> you can't access nohow. Download the drivers from the > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> OEM, you say? > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> Chances are excellent that the OEM has gone out of > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> business, or sold > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> out to a giant who prunes out what they don't like (and > >>> >>>>> > >>> >> what you > >>> >> > >>> >>>>> need), or changed the name or version number on it out of > sheer > >>> >>>>> orneryness. If you do get to what looks like the right > >>> drivers, > >>> >>>>> you're likely to find that the last minor upgrade version > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> that really > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> worked well for you has been dropped, or tweaked into > >>> >>>>> > >>> >> your trouble > >>> >> > >>> >>>>> zone. I can testify to ALL these experiences. I think > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> others can too. > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> *From:* Al Mulnick <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>> >>>>> *To:* [email protected] > >>> >>>>> <mailto:[email protected]> > >>> >>>>> *Sent:* Thursday, November 02, 2006 3:27 PM > >>> >>>>> *Subject:* Re: [ActiveDir] OT - Backup Follies (was) > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> Exchange Log > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> files --Disk Full-- > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> Trying to remember exactly, but doesn't BE have an > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> option to use > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> disk vs. tape drives? > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> You *could* run a test to help simplify and rule out > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> some of the > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> complexity. Could take a while, but might be worth it. > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> Al > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> On 11/2/06, *Albert Duro* <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> >>>>> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> Why does NTBackup work for me and BE not, when > >>> >>>>> > >>> >> they are at > >>> >> > >>> >>>>> core the same product? > >>> >>>>> I wondered about that too. Here are my thoughts. > >>> >>>>> First, NTBackup is a simpler product that doesn't > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> get tangled > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> up with the complexities of scheduling and a GUI. > >>> >>>>> But the real reason, I think, is that I've been doing > >>> >>>>> NTBackups to disk, while BE was to tape. > >>> >>>>> I've always suspected that most, if not all of my > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> difficulties > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> with BE had to do with the drivers for the tape > >>> >>>>> > >>> >> drives and > >>> >> > >>> >>>>> autoloaders, and with the SCSI interface to > >>> other devices > >>> >>>>> ('other' being anything beyond the normal HD and CD > >>> >>>>> complement) > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- > >>> >>>>> *From:* Al Mulnick <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>> >>>>> *To:* [email protected] > >>> >>>>> <mailto:[email protected]> > >>> >>>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, November 01, 2006 6:11 AM > >>> >>>>> *Subject:* Re: [ActiveDir] Exchange Log files -- > Disk > >>> >>>>> Full-- > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> Well put Albert. Thanks for that feedback. > >>> >>>>> What still has me curious is why BE wouldn't > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> work in your > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> environment and why ntbackup does (partially > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> at least). > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> ntbackup as written by the same exact people and has a lot > >>> >>>>> of the same code (it's licensed by Microsoft > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> from Seagate > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> last I checked). Ntbackup is the less > >>> >>>>> > >>> >> featured version > >>> >> > >>> >>>>> designed for single host backups and extended > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> to act like > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> it does more. > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> So that said, I agree that the goal is that > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> your client's > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> data is backed up. I have to say that I > >>> >>>>> > >>> >> disagree that > >>> >> > >>> >>>>> jury-rigs, mickey mouse and by the seat of > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> your pants is > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> the long term solution though. That's an > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> infrastructure > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> component that will come back to haunt at some > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> point down > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> the road. As an interim fix, of course it can > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> work. I'm > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> not blinded by the big vendors to the point > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> that I think > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> they have the only solution. Far from it. > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> But I like to > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> think that I can at least share some perspective > and > >>> >>>>> experience related to where it leads and I > >>> definitely > >>> >>>>> favor technology over layer8 processes. > >>> Why? Because > >>> >>>>> layer8 changes and grows out of current > >>> positions and > >>> >>>>> foundational solutions should not have to be > >>> >>>>> > >>> >> decimated > >>> >> > >>> >>>>> when that happens. I've seen that way too > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> often to care > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> to see it continue where possible. > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> Basically, I hate to see a foundational > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> solution such as > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> backup, rely on such complexity and human > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> intervention. I > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> completely understand that you have to do what > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> you have to > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> do. When you wrote it in your original email, > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> it sounded > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> like you approved of that method. Reading > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> this last one, > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> I can you don't. I was just trying to point > >>> >>>>> > >>> >> out where > >>> >> > >>> >>>>> that leads and trying to understand how you go > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> there. I > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> bet I would have gotten there the same way > >>> you did ;) > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> Best of luck getting that worked out. > >>> >>>>> If you need anything from me, please don't > >>> >>>>> > >>> >> hesitate. I > >>> >> > >>> >>>>> have been known to make some backup > >>> >>>>> > >>> >> solutions work :) > >>> >> > >>> >>>>> Feel free to ping off-line if I can be of any help. > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> On 10/31/06, *Albert Duro* > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> >>>>> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> Al, since you ask, no I don't see it > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> differently, at > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> least not at the oratorical level. But > >>> where the > >>> >>>>> rubber meets the road, things can look > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> very different. > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> Like the military say, the best laid plan > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> falls apart > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> the moment it meets the enemy. You > >>> assume that I > >>> >>>>> monkey around with Ntbackup and balky media > for > >>> >>>>> economic reasons. In fact, we spared no > expense > >>> >>>>> (relative to our small size) to put in > >>> >>>>> industrial-strength backup systems, both > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> software and > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> hardware. Even paid consultants to set > >>> it up and > >>> >>>>> manage it. > >>> >>>>> It blew up in our faces. Primarily > >>> >>>>> > >>> >> because Backup > >>> >> > >>> >>>>> Exec just wouldn't work right in our > >>> >>>>> > >>> >> environment. > >>> >> > >>> >>>>> (I'm not saying that BE isn't a fine product, it would > >>> >>>>> just never work for us). Why not? > >>> >>>>> > >>> >> Don't know -- I > >>> >> > >>> >>>>> couldn't figure it out. Our > >>> consultants couldn't > >>> >>>>> figure it out. Veritas support couldn't > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> either, nor > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> the autoloader manufacturer. For more > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> than two years, > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> nobody could figure it out, until I > >>> >>>>> > >>> >> decided to stop > >>> >> > >>> >>>>> throwing good money after bad. > >>> >>>>> Did I try alternative products? In the > >>> >>>>> > >>> >> same class, > >>> >> > >>> >>>>> yes -- more tales of woe, but different > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> reasons. We > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> did not nor are we going to buy the > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> high-end systems, > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> which cost more than our whole network is > worth. > >>> >>>>> So I was left with NTBackup, and admittedly a > >>> >>>>> little more gun-shyness about brand-name > backup > >>> >>>>> products than is strictly rational. > >>> >>>>> > >>> >> That's what I > >>> >> > >>> >>>>> have to work with, and I try to make the > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> best of it. > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> That's the 'real world' in my little corner of it. > >>> >>>>> Believe me, when you and joe and others on > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> this list > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> urge us to 'make the best', I listen, I > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> learn, and I > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> applaud. And it does push me in that > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> direction. But > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> the only path there goes through 'make > >>> >>>>> > >>> >> the best of > >>> >> > >>> >>>>> what you've got'. It's bumpy and often > >>> >>>>> > >>> >> barricaded. > >>> >> > >>> >>>>> But after all is said and done, the REAL > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> point is that > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> I am preserving my clients' data and > >>> keeping them > >>> >>>>> happy. Jury-rigs, mickey mouse, and > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> by-the-pants not > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> withstanding. > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> -- Original Message ----- > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> *From:* Al Mulnick > >>> >>>>> > >>> >> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>> >> > >>> >>>>> *To:* [email protected] > >>> >>>>> <mailto:[email protected]> > >>> >>>>> *Sent:* Sunday, October 29, 2006 4:30 AM > >>> >>>>> *Subject:* Re: [ActiveDir] Exchange > >>> Log files > >>> >>>>> --Disk Full-- > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> sub-optimal media are part of the > >>> real world? > >>> >>>>> Wow, thanks :) > >>> >>>>> Truth be told, that's a rant of mine. > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> I've heard > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> a lot (lately especially) about how we > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> want to do > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> things cheap and inexpensive and > >>> we'll fix it > >>> >>>>> later and so on. I've also spent a > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> great deal of > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> time cleaning up that kind of stuff. > >>> >>>>> Unfortunately, once it escapes into the "real > >>> >>>>> world" then it becomes more difficult > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> to clean up > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> because you have to do so in front of > >>> >>>>> customers/clients. > >>> >>>>> Interesting approach though. Usually a > less > >>> >>>>> disciplined from what I've seen and > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> often results > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> in more expense related to downtime and > >>> >>>>> troubleshooting and lack of service. I'm > >>> >>>>> interested if you see differently though. > >>> >>>>> This area of the business fascinates > me.... > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> On 10/28/06, *Albert Duro* > >>> >>>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> >>>>> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> I'm sure you and Susan are > >>> >>>>> > >>> >> right. All I'm > >>> >> > >>> >>>>> saying is that it *can* happen, > >>> >>>>> > >>> >> and for me, > >>> >> > >>> >>>>> why take the chance when > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> one-job/one-task is > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> easy to do. > >>> >>>>> Good point about the media, and that > may > >>> >>>>> explain my case, but, hey, > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> sub-optimal media > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> situations are part of the real > world. > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- > >>> >>>>> *From:* Al Mulnick > >>> >>>>> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>> >>>>> *To:* > [email protected] > >>> >>>>> > >>> <mailto:[email protected]> > >>> >>>>> *Sent:* Saturday, October 28, > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> 2006 6:33 AM > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> *Subject:* Re: [ActiveDir] > >>> >>>>> > >>> >> Exchange Log > >>> >> > >>> >>>>> files --Disk Full-- > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> I've not had that same > experience. > >>> >>>>> Granted, it's a limited feature utility > >>> >>>>> (note the use of the word > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> utility vs. tool > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> as requested) but it's still > >>> >>>>> > >>> >> capable of > >>> >> > >>> >>>>> doing more. There were > >>> some fixes to > >>> >>>>> ntbackup in service packs and > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> such. You > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> might want to verify you're > >>> using the > >>> >>>>> latest version of that's > >>> >>>>> > >>> >> what you see. > >>> >> > >>> >>>>> Also, check the media it's > >>> >>>>> > >>> >> headed to. > >>> >> > >>> >>>>> It's error handling is not very elegant, > >>> >>>>> but I've found it to be useful > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> and strong > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> enough to stand up to some > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> complex tasks > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> in the past. I've got several > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> running now > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> via cli that have been in > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> place for more > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> than half a year without issue > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> (I know, I > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> know, spend all that money on an > >>> >>>>> enterprise backup system > >>> >>>>> > >>> >> only to backup > >>> >> > >>> >>>>> some machines locally. But > >>> there are > >>> >>>>> times when it makes more > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> sense, trust me.) > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> -ajm > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> On 10/27/06, *Albert Duro* > >>> >>>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> I've found, with NTbackup, > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> that if you > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> cram two or more tasks > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> into a backup > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> job, it's very likely to > >>> >>>>> > >>> >> fail. For > >>> >> > >>> >>>>> example, if you do a > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> System State and > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> a file backup and an > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> Exchange backup > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> in the same job. It's best > to > >>> >>>>> separate each task into > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> its own job, > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> and sort it out in the > >>> >>>>> > >>> >> scheduling. > >>> >> > >>> >>>>> A mixed job will also work > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> for a while > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> and then fail, which > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> sounds like what > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> happened to OP. > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> ----- Original Message -- > --- > >>> >>>>> *From:* Wells, James > Arthur > >>> >>>>> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>> >>>>> *To:* > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> [email protected] > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> <mailto:[email protected]> > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> *Cc:* Technical Support > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> *Sent:* Thursday, > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> October 26, 2006 > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> 2:21 PM > >>> >>>>> *Subject:* RE: > [ActiveDir] > >>> >>>>> Exchange Log files > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> --Disk Full-- > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> Do you have multiple > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> information > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> stores on this > >>> >>>>> > >>> >> storage group? > >>> >> > >>> >>>>> (If using Exchange Enterprise > >>> >>>>> edition)...the logs > >>> >>>>> > >>> >> can't flush > >>> >> > >>> >>>>> until all stores have a > full > >>> >>>>> backup, because the logs > are > >>> >>>>> shared... > >>> >>>>> --James > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> -------------------------------------------------------------- > >>> >>> ---------- > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> *From:* > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>> >>>>> [mailto: > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>] > >>> >>>>> *On Behalf Of > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> *Technical Support > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> *Sent:* Thursday, > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> October 26, 2006 > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> 3:16 PM > >>> >>>>> *To:* > >>> >>>>> [email protected] > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>; > >>> >>>>> > [email protected] > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> <mailto:[email protected]> > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> *Subject:* RE: > [ActiveDir] > >>> >>>>> Exchange Log files > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> --Disk Full-- > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> Hi, > >>> >>>>> I am running Normal > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> Backup. Using > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> NTBackup Utility. Backing > up > >>> >>>>> Information store. > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> -------------------------------------------------------------- > >>> >>> ---------- > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> *From:* > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>> >>>>> on behalf of Missy > Koslosky > >>> >>>>> *Sent:* Thu > >>> >>>>> > >>> >> 10/26/2006 12:49 PM > >>> >> > >>> >>>>> *To:* > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> [email protected] > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> <mailto:[email protected]> > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> *Subject:* RE: > [ActiveDir] > >>> >>>>> Exchange Log files > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> --Disk Full-- > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> Are you running full > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> (AKA normal) > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> backups every night? > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> It seems not. > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> Use NTBackup to > >>> >>>>> > >>> >> backup to disk > >>> >> > >>> >>>>> (obviously, you'll > >>> >>>>> > >>> >> need a disk > >>> >> > >>> >>>>> with over 120GB of > available > >>> >>>>> space) and then use > whatever > >>> >>>>> normal program you > >>> >>>>> > >>> >> use to back > >>> >> > >>> >>>>> that backup onto tape. > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> This will > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> keep you running > >>> >>>>> > >>> >> until you sort > >>> >> > >>> >>>>> out why your normal > backup > >>> >>>>> software isn't > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> flushing the logs > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> when the backup > completes. > >>> >>>>> How are you > >>> >>>>> > >>> >> currently running > >>> >> > >>> >>>>> backups? What software > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> is in use? > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> Are you sure it's > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> Exchange aware? > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> Are you doing brick > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> level backups > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> or copy backups > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> instead of a full > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> backup? Neither will > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> flush the logs. > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> I'd resolve this as > >>> >>>>> > >>> >> quickly as > >>> >> > >>> >>>>> possible, because if > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> you are in a > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> situation where you > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> have to replay > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> the logs, you're NOT > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> going to be a > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> happy camper. > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> -------------------------------------------------------------- > >>> >>> ---------- > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> *From:* > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>> >>>>> [mailto: > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>] > >>> >>>>> *On Behalf Of > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> *Technical Support > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> *Sent:* Thursday, > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> October 26, 2006 > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> 11:09 AM > >>> >>>>> *To:* > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> [email protected] > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> <mailto:[email protected]> > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> *Subject:* > >>> >>>>> > >>> >> [ActiveDir] Exchange > >>> >> > >>> >>>>> Log files --Disk Full-- > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> Hi All, > >>> >>>>> Kindly suggest, > >>> >>>>> > >>> >> what i can do > >>> >> > >>> >>>>> about my Exchange Log > files? > >>> >>>>> I have about 120 GB > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> Log files for > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> past 4 months. I have > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> a few doubts:- > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> Do i really need all > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> those log > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> files? > >>> >>>>> If yes, Then how is it > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> possible to > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> manage with this as i > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> have a very > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> limited space left. > >>> >>>>> Can i delete these > >>> log files? > >>> >>>>> Backup doesnt remove > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> these log files? > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> i am really running > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> out of space > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> on my Exchange log > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>> storage drive. > >>> >>> > >>> >>>>> *Thanks!!!* > >>> >>>>> Ravi > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>>> > >>> >>>> List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > >>> >>>> List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > >>> >>>> List archive: > >>> >>>> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ > >>> >>>> > >>> >>> List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > >>> >>> List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > >>> >>> List archive: > >>> >>> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ > >>> >>> > >>> >> List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > >>> >> List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > >>> >> List archive: > >>> >> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ > >>> >> List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > >>> >> List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > >>> >> List archive: > >>> >> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ > >>> >> > >>> > > >>> > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > >>> > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > >>> > List archive: > >>> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ > >>> > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > >>> > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > >>> > List archive: > >>> > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ > >>> > > >>> > > >>> List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > >>> List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > >>> List archive: > >>> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ > >>> List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > >>> List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > >>> List archive: > >>> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ > >> > >> List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > >> List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > >> List archive: http://www.mail- > archive.com/[email protected]/ > > > > > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > > List archive: http://www.mail- > archive.com/[email protected]/ > > > > > List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx > List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx > List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ List info : http://www.activedir.org/List.aspx List FAQ : http://www.activedir.org/ListFAQ.aspx List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
