Re: [Veritas-bu] DSU - Update
Simon, Firstly, have you tuned SIZE_DATA_BUFFERS_DISK and NUMBER_DATA_BUFFERS_DISK? Other than that, performance management when writing backups to disk is very different to tape. Writing multiple streams to a single DSU or volume group can work well, until you hit a magical threshold and suddenly performance dives through the floor. Although writing a backup to disk is a sequential write operation, if you write more than one stream in parallel, it suddenly becomes random writes from the disk subsystem's perspective, which can have major performance implications. You also need to look at what other activity is happening in the EVA at the time, and particular on the same volume set (or RAID set, or whatever terminolgy is used). You could also look at performance on the disk controller/s and interface/s. Aside from all that,you've got your work cut out trying to get any disk to outperform an LTO3 (performing sequential writes). Despite what various vendors tell you, tape is very well suited to backup workloads. It was designed for it! Backing up to disk is better suited to slower clients that can't send data to the media server fast enough to keep the tape drive streaming. That's all my opinion, and I might be a bit biased ;) Cheers, Dean On 9/11/06, WEAVER, Simon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: All I have been testing DSU backups, and must admit I have not been impressed with the throughput to disk. I ran a particular job over the weekend. Setup as follows: LAN Client normally takes 2-3hours via Tape LTO3 HP ESL Created a Disk on my Master Server Configured a DSU with phase 2 Set the policy to use the newly created storage unit. Let the backup run. The backup took 4 hours (just over). However, writing to tape (I guess when it does its duplication) took under 1 hour. The Disk that was presented to my Master is a VDISK from a HP EVA using Fibre SCSI disks. Essentially the HP EVA is a large SAN, and you can create volumes and present them to a specific Server. Have I missed something here, or is it a case that my Tape Setup (that is all fibre channel connected) is actually running better than I thought. Thanks Regards Simon Weaver3rd Line Technical Support Windows Domain Administrator EADS Astrium Limited, B23AA IM (DCS)Anchorage Road, Portsmouth, PO3 5PU Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] This email is for the intended addressee only.If you have received it in error then you must not use, retain, disseminate or otherwise deal with it.Please notify the sender by return email. The views of the author may not necessarily constitute the views of Astrium Limited.Nothing in this email shall bind Astrium Limited in any contract or obligation.Astrium Limited, Registered in England and Wales No. 2449259 Registered Office: Gunnels Wood Road, Stevenage, Hertfordshire, SG1 2AS, England___Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.eduhttp://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] Image report
Morning All I have been asked to put a report together detailing all the valid images in an environment. So what I have done is performed a bpimagelist since 1970 to date using the idonly , option to extract every backupid on the system. Once this is retrieved I then perform a separate bpimagelist per backupid and extract the Info to append to a formatted output report. Two questions really ... 1. Due to the number of images this report can take up to 3.5 hours , can anyone think of a quicker way of doing this. 2. When I produce the original list the list is approx 3500 images. By the time the report finishes the report has reported on nearly 600 images less than the total 3500. Initially I thought there was a simple explanation i.e. during the time the report was running , images where expiring but this doesn't seem to be the case . I seem to remember a utility whereas you can clean up the catalog ? Regards Dave Notice to recipient: The information in this internet e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may be privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. If you are not the intended addressee please notify the sender immediately by telephone. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful. When addressed to external clients any opinions or advice contained in this internet e-mail are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in any applicable governing terms of business or client engagement letter issued by the pertinent Bank of America group entity. If this email originates from the U.K. please note that Bank of America, N.A., London Branch and Banc of America Securities Limited are authorised and regulated by the Financial Services Authority. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.0 Performance Very Slow
Recently I Installed Netbackup 6.0 MP3 in our environment with the following architecture. 1 Master Server and 2 Media Server. I am taking file server backup of Mapped Drive of SAN with 730 GB of Data. This is the same server in which Media Server is attached . I am having LTO 3 Robotic Library with 28 Slots (HP MSP 6000 Model). The Backup takes 30 Hours to finish entire 730GB at7000 KB/ Sec (6MB/Sec) of data and i tried all the performance tuning mentioned in Netbackup guide. Nothing worked. Anybody does the tuning and any suggestion to reduce my backup windows ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.0 Performance Very Slow
On 9/11/2006 6:34 AM, Ganapathy G wrote: Recently I Installed Netbackup 6.0 MP3 in our environment with the following architecture. 1 Master Server and 2 Media Server. I am taking file server backup of Mapped Drive of SAN with 730 GB of Data. This is the same server in which Media Server is attached . I am having LTO 3 Robotic Library with 28 Slots (HP MSP 6000 Model). The Backup takes 30 Hours to finish entire 730GB at 7000 KB/ Sec (6MB/Sec) of data and i tried all the performance tuning mentioned in Netbackup guide. Nothing worked. Anybody does the tuning and any suggestion to reduce my backup windows Do you have lots and lots of small files or large files? If you have a lot of small files, then you may need to look at something like FlashBackup to improve your performance. You said you've tried everything in the tuning guide so there's not much else for us to recommend. .../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] NBU vs Legato
Chris, What do you think of the support from Legato compared to NBU ? -Shyam On 9/11/06, Christian Sønder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi,I jused to administrate a 350+ client Legato setup, and for the past 2½ years I have been part of administrate a 1200+ client NBU setup - my experience is : Legato :+ : much better at handling backup to disk, can backup multiple instances on MS-SQL server with a single command, much better security on who can administrate AND from where, better debuging of why a client isn't running (savegrp -Envvvc), can handle tape write errors (NBU restarts at last checkpoint or restart entire job if database backup - thats BAD) - : uses alot of ports, 7937-9936 + 1-3, not the best report utility, though mminfo can do pretty much everything u need, poor silo handling (need to import media when u recreate a Silo (haven't seen the new 7.3 which should be able to edit a silo), if a group is running u cant restart another client in that groupNBU :+ : max streams pr. tapedevice, Java GUI is OK, good silo handling, can upgrade (unix) clients from CLI at master - : lousy at writing to disk, bad catalog (use a DB instead, like NBU6.0), when moving a client fra from group/policy to another u get a full backup at next run, exclude/include list is locatedclient side,Thats just top of my head on a Monday morning - I would like to get comments other suggestions/differnces between the two products :) Best regardsChristian Sonder-Oprindelig meddelelse-Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]] På vegne af Philip McDougalSendt: 8. september 2006 16:40Til: Daniel Teklu; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Emne: Re: [Veritas-bu] NBU vs LegatoI too would like to see this and/or also a comparison to CommVault.I am new to NBU after working with Legato for 6 years and at the moment,I find Legato to be much easier to administrate with much less hardware and it performed better.However, the latest version of Legato (7.3) isjust as buggy as 6.0.I think both companies pushed out the latestrelease way too early but felt compelled to do so with the competitive market pressures.One thing I like with NBU is the out of the box reporting features.Legato is getting better (and there are free utilities out there thathelp) but they still have a way to go.Thanks! PM.-Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED][mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of DanielTekluSent: Friday, September 08, 2006 8:41 AMTo: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.eduSubject: [Veritas-bu] NBU vs Legato Does any one have NBU vs Legato comparison docs? I have worked with NBUin the past but not with Legato. At my new pos. we need to upgrade theNBU env. I just want good reasons why we should not go with Legato but upgrade the current version of NBU.This is on a Solaris env.Thanks in advance.-DCONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message (including any attachments) isintended solely for the use of GFI Group Inc., its affiliates and the individual addressee(s). This message may contain confidential and/orprivate information privileged to recipient or recipients named above.If you are not the authorized recipient(s), or the employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient(s),please immediately notify the sender by e-mail at the address shownabove and delete this message from your system, other storage mechanismand/or shred the document and any attachments. Any unauthorized use, review or dissemination of this message in whole or in part by personsor entities other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited.GFI Group Inc. shall not be liable for the improper or incompletetransmission of the information contained in this communication nor for any delay in its receipt or damage to your system.___Veritas-bu maillist-Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-buCALAMOS INVESTMENTS CANNOT ACT UPON, AND WILL NOT ACCEPT, ANY TIME-SENSITIVE ELECTRONIC MESSAGES, SUCH AS TRANSACTION ORDERS AND FUND TRANSFER INSTRUCTIONS. ALSO, FOR YOUR PROTECTION, PLEASE DO NOT SEND ANY IDENTIFYING INFORMATION, SUCH AS ACCOUNT NUMBERS OR SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS, THROUGH THE INTERNET. CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential . If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is prohibited. Please notify the sender immediately if this message was transmitted in error. Thank you. ___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] NBU vs Legato
Hi, Before I had support through a reseller here in Denamrk, called ProAct systems, that worked beatifully - the few times I had to speak with support, I talked to Cedric Junker and got the answers i needed fast Today I talk to support with Symantec, primarily UK, they get the problems solved, but sometimes it takes a while to get over the who-are-u-and-what-kind-of-system-do-u-have. When u get through there telefone queue and irritating music and a engineer gets assigned to a case, then a solution quickly comes :) Conclussion - same-same, minor differences when the problems u almost everytime opens, is bugs and things that dosen't work as they are supposed to :) Best regards Christian Fra: Shyam Hazari [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 11. september 2006 14:29Til: Christian SønderCc: Philip McDougal; Daniel Teklu; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.eduEmne: Re: [Veritas-bu] NBU vs Legato Chris, What do you think of the support from Legato compared to NBU ? -Shyam On 9/11/06, Christian Sønder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi,I jused to administrate a 350+ client Legato setup, and for the past 2½ years I have been part of administrate a 1200+ client NBU setup - my experience is : Legato :+ : much better at handling backup to disk, can backup multiple instances on MS-SQL server with a single command, much better security on who can administrate AND from where, better debuging of why a client isn't running (savegrp -Envvvc), can handle tape write errors (NBU restarts at last checkpoint or restart entire job if database backup - thats BAD) - : uses alot of ports, 7937-9936 + 1-3, not the best report utility, though mminfo can do pretty much everything u need, poor silo handling (need to import media when u recreate a Silo (haven't seen the new 7.3 which should be able to edit a silo), if a group is running u cant restart another client in that groupNBU :+ : max streams pr. tapedevice, Java GUI is OK, good silo handling, can upgrade (unix) clients from CLI at master - : lousy at writing to disk, bad catalog (use a DB instead, like NBU6.0), when moving a client fra from group/policy to another u get a full backup at next run, exclude/include list is locatedclient side,Thats just top of my head on a Monday morning - I would like to get comments other suggestions/differnces between the two products :) Best regardsChristian Sonder-Oprindelig meddelelse-Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]] På vegne af Philip McDougalSendt: 8. september 2006 16:40Til: Daniel Teklu; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.eduEmne: Re: [Veritas-bu] NBU vs LegatoI too would like to see this and/or also a comparison to CommVault.I am new to NBU after working with Legato for 6 years and at the moment,I find Legato to be much easier to administrate with much less hardware and it performed better.However, the latest version of Legato (7.3) isjust as buggy as 6.0.I think both companies pushed out the latestrelease way too early but felt compelled to do so with the competitive market pressures.One thing I like with NBU is the out of the box reporting features.Legato is getting better (and there are free utilities out there thathelp) but they still have a way to go.Thanks! PM.-Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED][mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of DanielTekluSent: Friday, September 08, 2006 8:41 AMTo: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.eduSubject: [Veritas-bu] NBU vs Legato Does any one have NBU vs Legato comparison docs? I have worked with NBUin the past but not with Legato. At my new pos. we need to upgrade theNBU env. I just want good reasons why we should not go with Legato but upgrade the current version of NBU.This is on a Solaris env.Thanks in advance.-DCONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message (including any attachments) isintended solely for the use of GFI Group Inc., its affiliates and the individual addressee(s). This message may contain confidential and/orprivate information privileged to recipient or recipients named above.If you are not the authorized recipient(s), or the employee or agentresponsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient(s),please immediately notify the sender by e-mail at the address shownabove and delete this message from your system, other storage mechanismand/or shred the document and any attachments. Any unauthorized use, review or dissemination of this message in whole or in part by personsor entities other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited.GFI Group Inc. shall not be liable for the improper or incompletetransmission of the information contained in this communication nor for any delay in its receipt or damage to your system.___Veritas-bu maillist-Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu
Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup catalog migration
Thanks for all your responses :-) It looks like I have to get it all together. Probably I will have to install NBU 5.X server only for NetBackup catalog conversion purposes. regards, Darek Klar WEAVER, Simon napisał(a): You need to go from 5.x and then to 6.0 There is no way to upgrade from 4.5 directly - unless Symantec have changed the rules. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Flashbackup and Database clients
will flashbackup help speedup my lotus notes database agent backups?___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] NBU and VMWare
Hello Everyone! For those who have NBU 5.x/6.x and ESX VMWare server, I was wondering if you would share your backup and recovery strategy for the ESX server. Especially, what is your plan to recover the ESX server in the event of total loss? How do you backup virtual instances/partitions, cold/hot? What is your performance experience when you have a NBU agent installed on virtual partition? Any other tips and suggestions would be greatly appreciated Kind regards, Oleg Ivanov 646-296-0002 ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Flashbackup and Database clients
Flashbackups will help if you havemillions of small files. -Shyam On 9/11/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: will flashbackup help speedup my lotus notes database agent backups? ___Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.eduhttp://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] NBU and VMWare
We don't back up the guest OS on the VM's. We just back up the ESX servers themselves and get the vmdk's etc. Our VM storage is also on the SAN though so performance hit is nearly undetectable (we use the backups from the SAN rather than the ESX servers, that way all we back up on the ESX servers is the ESX OS itself). But our VM strategy is also a little different than some. We only virtualize the minor servers. Things like WSUS that can be rebuilt and any data loss is of little consequence. We do also have a few DFS servers virtualized but again, those are easily rebuilt. Their storage is a LUN on our SAN. This makes it almost useless/pointless to run NBU on the guest OS. We have done it before but and there is a noticeable performance hit for that VM (which can affect the whole thing if your ESX server is not properly set up for such activities) so we just don't do it. We have had issues virtualizing servers that have high disk I/O (like major file servers, e-mail servers, etc). Disk I/O being the bottle neck of most any system, this is kind of understandable. Thus we don't virtualize anything like that. Which is another performance factor with backing up the guest OS. Because of the disk I/O problem alone, I would be very careful with backing up guest OS's making sure not t! o multi stream from too many VM's on the same ESX server. And we always do it hot. Our VM's run 24x7. The only exceptions are for scheduled maintenance which doesn't happen here near as much as it should. We run NBU 6 MP2 from a Win 2K Server, BTW. I would also review the linked PDF if I were you. http://www.vmware.com/pdf/ESXBackup.pdf#search=%22How%20to%20backup%20VMWare%20ESX%22 Phil Koster Network Administrator City of Grand Rapids Direct: 616-456-3136 Helpdesk: 456-3999 -Original Message- From: Oleg Ivanov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 9:05 AM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] NBU and VMWare Hello Everyone! For those who have NBU 5.x/6.x and ESX VMWare server, I was wondering if you would share your backup and recovery strategy for the ESX server. Especially, what is your plan to recover the ESX server in the event of total loss? How do you backup virtual instances/partitions, cold/hot? What is your performance experience when you have a NBU agent installed on virtual partition? Any other tips and suggestions would be greatly appreciated Kind regards, Oleg Ivanov 646-296-0002 ___ 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] Flashbackup and Database clients
Title: Message AND your filesystem is "mostly" used. ie, you wouldn't want to use flashbackup on a 1TB filesystem that only has 100Gig of data on it. Paul -- -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Shyam HazariSent: September 11, 2006 9:38 AMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.eduSubject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Flashbackup and Database clients Flashbackups will help if you havemillions of small files. -Shyam On 9/11/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: will flashbackup help speedup my lotus notes database agent backups? ___Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.eduhttp://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 6.0 Performance Very Slow
You can try to break up the sets of data into multiple streams to get the speed up. For example:New Stream M:\directory1\ M:\directory2\ New Stream M:\directory3\ New Stream M:\directory4\ and so on. Of course you'd need to do some research and make sure that you divide up the streams into even chunks of data. You can also use wildcards if your directory structure is large. Review the Manuals for more info on using multiple streams and wildcards. You also said that this is a Media Server. Have you presented tape drives to this server and setup a storage unit? If so, is the policy using this storage unit? The speeds you've stated lead me to believe that the backup is occurring over the network instead of SCSI or FC. Taking advantage of a storage unit on this media server will be your biggest increase in speed if you aren't doing that already. -Rusty From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ganapathy GSent: Monday, September 11, 2006 6:34 AMTo: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.eduSubject: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.0 Performance Very Slow Recently I Installed Netbackup 6.0 MP3 in our environment with the following architecture. 1 Master Server and 2 Media Server. I am taking file server backup of Mapped Drive of SAN with 730 GB of Data. This is the same server in which Media Server is attached . I am having LTO 3 Robotic Library with 28 Slots (HP MSP 6000 Model). The Backup takes 30 Hours to finish entire 730GB at7000 KB/ Sec (6MB/Sec) of data and i tried all the performance tuning mentioned in Netbackup guide. Nothing worked. Anybody does the tuning and any suggestion to reduce my backup windows ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.0 Performance Very Slow
Just thinking out loud... I echo Ed Wilts inquiry about file size. If you have millions of small files that will slow you down substantially. Have you checked for overall network throughput? Specifically, would you be able to verify that the NIC is set to 10/100/1000 (whatever you line speed is) full duplex. Duplex mismatches cause headaches. Speed reductions do to. We have had speed reductions on the swich port on two separate occasions after bouncing the switch. You can verify duplex mismatch on your end (if you are working with a UNIX client) by checking for collisions or errors with outgoing packets. Good luck, Bill From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ganapathy GSent: Monday, September 11, 2006 5:34 AMTo: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.eduSubject: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.0 Performance Very Slow Recently I Installed Netbackup 6.0 MP3 in our environment with the following architecture. 1 Master Server and 2 Media Server. I am taking file server backup of Mapped Drive of SAN with 730 GB of Data. This is the same server in which Media Server is attached . I am having LTO 3 Robotic Library with 28 Slots (HP MSP 6000 Model). The Backup takes 30 Hours to finish entire 730GB at7000 KB/ Sec (6MB/Sec) of data and i tried all the performance tuning mentioned in Netbackup guide. Nothing worked. Anybody does the tuning and any suggestion to reduce my backup windows ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.0 Performance Very Slow
G. If this is all SAN attached i.e. the disk is on the SAN attached to the Media Server and the LTO3 are on the SAN and attached to the Media Server, you should be seeing single stream performance of at least 15MB/sec at the minimum. Since you are only seeing 6MB/sec that sounds more like you are on 100Mbit LAN connection trying to back up to the LTO3 drives but I may be wrong. You can try using multiple streams of data but that may or may not help depending on how the disk was laid out. You could end up overloading the disk controllers if you set up too many streams on a partition that is only comprised of 2 or 3 drives. Performance tuning (increasing buffers and sizes) can give you about 10% better back up speed, but if you are only getting 6MB/sec then something is seriously wrong with your hardware strategy. Also, you dont mention if this is Windows or Unix. This can affect your speed as well (Windows is traditionally slower per stream) but even with Windows you should be getting 15 20MB/sec per stream if your hardware will support it. Cheers, d. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ganapathy G Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 4:34 AM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.0 Performance Very Slow Recently I Installed Netbackup 6.0 MP3 in our environment with the following architecture. 1 Master Server and 2 Media Server. I am taking file server backup of Mapped Drive of SAN with 730 GB of Data. This is the same server in which Media Server is attached . I am having LTO 3 Robotic Library with 28 Slots (HP MSP 6000 Model). The Backup takes 30 Hours to finish entire 730GB at7000 KB/ Sec (6MB/Sec) of data and i tried all the performance tuning mentioned in Netbackup guide. Nothing worked. Anybody does the tuning and any suggestion to reduce my backup windows ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.0 Performance Very Slow
You can also run bpkar32 to see how fast the Netbackup executable can read the data off your disks. This will eliminate the whole network / media server versus local bottleneck argument. http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/242918.htm -Jonathan From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of DaveSent: Monday, September 11, 2006 12:09 PMTo: 'Ganapathy G'; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.eduSubject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.0 Performance Very Slow G. If this is all SAN attached i.e. the disk is on the SAN attached to the Media Server and the LTO3 are on the SAN and attached to the Media Server, you should be seeing single stream performance of at least 15MB/sec at the minimum. Since you are only seeing 6MB/sec that sounds more like you are on 100Mbit LAN connection trying to back up to the LTO3 drives but I may be wrong. You can try using multiple streams of data but that may or may not help depending on how the disk was laid out. You could end up overloading the disk controllers if you set up too many streams on a partition that is only comprised of 2 or 3 drives. Performance tuning (increasing buffers and sizes) can give you about 10% better back up speed, but if you are only getting 6MB/sec then something is seriously wrong with your hardware strategy. Also, you dont mention if this is Windows or Unix. This can affect your speed as well (Windows is traditionally slower per stream) but even with Windows you should be getting 15 20MB/sec per stream if your hardware will support it. Cheers, d. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ganapathy GSent: Monday, September 11, 2006 4:34 AMTo: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.eduSubject: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.0 Performance Very Slow Recently I Installed Netbackup 6.0 MP3 in our environment with the following architecture. 1 Master Server and 2 Media Server. I am taking file server backup of Mapped Drive of SAN with 730 GB of Data. This is the same server in which Media Server is attached . I am having LTO 3 Robotic Library with 28 Slots (HP MSP 6000 Model). The Backup takes 30 Hours to finish entire 730GB at7000 KB/ Sec (6MB/Sec) of data and i tried all the performance tuning mentioned in Netbackup guide. Nothing worked. Anybody does the tuning and any suggestion to reduce my backup windows ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Policy Info
Im think I have a something major wrong, the strange errors that was posted last week might be a result of some corruption. How do I check from command line (using Linux) to see what a policy attributes are? Most of all I want to verify that the Catalog backup was done and where it is stored. Dustin D'Amour Coyote Solutions Group 505.742.0066 www.coyotesolutions.com Relax...it's just an update for the patch to fix the nerf that nerfed the fix for the update of the patch that broke the fix that was fixed. --Unkown ...Be not afraid of greatness: some are born great, some achieve greatness, and some have greatness thrust upon them. --William Shakespeare ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Policy Info
Title: Message bppllist: [policy name] [-L|-l|-U] [-verbose] [-allpolicies] [-M master_server,...,master_server] [-hwos] [-byclient client] [-keyword "keyword phrase"] Paul -- -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dustin D'AmourSent: September 11, 2006 1:38 PMTo: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.eduSubject: [Veritas-bu] Policy Info Im think I have a something major wrong, the strange errors that was posted last week might be a result of some corruption. How do I check from command line (using Linux) to see what a policy attributes are? Most of all I want to verify that the Catalog backup was done and where it is stored. Dustin D'Amour Coyote Solutions Group 505.742.0066 www.coyotesolutions.com "Relax...it's just an update for the patch to fix the nerf that nerfed the fix for the update of the patch that broke the fix that was fixed." --Unkown "...Be not afraid of greatness: some are born great, some achieve greatness, and some have greatness thrust upon them." --William Shakespeare 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] Policy Info
Title: Message Thanks Paul, It appears I have to reinstall NetBackup 6 and restore the catalog. Dustin D'Amour Coyote Solutions Group 505.742.0066 www.coyotesolutions.com Relax...it's just an update for the patch to fix the nerf that nerfed the fix for the update of the patch that broke the fix that was fixed. --Author Unkown ...Be not afraid of greatness: some are born great, some achieve greatness, and some have greatness thrust upon them. --William Shakespeare From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Keating Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 11:45 AM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Policy Info bppllist: [policy name] [-L|-l|-U] [-verbose] [-allpolicies] [-M master_server,...,master_server] [-hwos] [-byclient client] [-keyword keyword phrase] Paul -- -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dustin D'Amour Sent: September 11, 2006 1:38 PM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Policy Info Im think I have a something major wrong, the strange errors that was posted last week might be a result of some corruption. How do I check from command line (using Linux) to see what a policy attributes are? Most of all I want to verify that the Catalog backup was done and where it is stored. Dustin D'Amour Coyote Solutions Group 505.742.0066 www.coyotesolutions.com Relax...it's just an update for the patch to fix the nerf that nerfed the fix for the update of the patch that broke the fix that was fixed. --Unkown ...Be not afraid of greatness: some are born great, some achieve greatness, and some have greatness thrust upon them. --William Shakespeare ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Flashbackup and Database clients
Title: Message Agreed. I implemented a Flashbackup policy for a server with 10M files (30 raw disk streams, 1.4 TB) this past weekend (using the copy-on-write method), and itsaved me exactly 0 drive hours in the tape drive bank :) Write speeds were roughly 30-50% faster, but the extra data made up for the savings. We run at about 60-70% usage, and were hoping to get away with not having to divvy up the server into two categories: which filesystems to back up with Flashbackup, and which not to.Looks like the problem is that the file to block mapping just takes too @*#$ long. Cheers, Jon From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul KeatingSent: Monday, September 11, 2006 10:23 AMTo: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.eduSubject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Flashbackup and Database clients AND your filesystem is "mostly" used. ie, you wouldn't want to use flashbackup on a 1TB filesystem that only has 100Gig of data on it. Paul -- -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Shyam HazariSent: September 11, 2006 9:38 AMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.eduSubject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Flashbackup and Database clients Flashbackups will help if you havemillions of small files. -Shyam On 9/11/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: will flashbackup help speedup my lotus notes database agent backups? ___Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.eduhttp://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu This message may contain privileged and/or confidential information. If you have received this e-mail in error or are not the intended recipient, you may not use, copy, disseminate or distribute it; do not open any attachments, delete it immediately from your system and notify the sender promptly by e-mail that you have done so. Thank you. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Multiple-Nics
Ok... so three new media servers with 4 nics each are headed my way in the next few weeks. That's 12 interfaces I've got to worry about! According to the NBU Performance Planning Tuning Guide I should create DNS entries for each interface, and add all interfaces to each server's bp.conf (or registry in windows.) I'm going to get all these values setup and ready to go before the hardware even arrives. backup1 (IP1) backup1-neta (IP2) backup1-netb (IP3) backup1-netc (IP4) backup2 (IP1) backup2-neta (IP2) backup2-netb (IP3) backup2-netc (IP4) backup3 (IP1) backup3-neta (IP2) backup3-netb (IP3) backup3-netc (IP4) So the servers will all talk to each other across the various nics (by looking up the server name) but how do clients know which IP to use? Many of those IPs are going to be on a non-routed "backend" network, which several clients will not have access to. How does the Master / Media server know which nic to use to communicate with the client? Further, how do I tell my jobs which IP to use?! For example, if I have 6 nics on 3 servers in the "back end" will NBU automatically local balance between them? Perhaps I should enable teaming? Any input on how this done properly would be appreciated. Unfortunately the HOSTS file lookup method we use now is unacceptable (and dumb) so I'll have to make this work properly. -Jonathan ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiple-Nics
Title: Message servers should talk to each other via the "main" interfaces, hopefully, if your networks and routing are configured properly. ie, if yourSTU specifies "backup2" as the media server, then the master will talk to it via the interface named "media2" How the master server decides which of its interfaces to talk out of is more complicated if there are more than one interface on a given subnet, and they're not trunkedcould cause some "unexpected issues". the clients will talk back to whatever interface a connection is requested from. f'rinstance.backup1 has 4 interfaces for example: backup1 (IP1) - 192.168.1.10/24 backup1-neta (IP2)192.168.2.10/24 backup1-netb (IP3)192.168.3.10/24 backup1-netc (IP4) 192.168.4.10/24 A backup of a client is attempted, and that client has an IP of 192.168.3.16 The media server will select the interface connected to the proper subnet which is "backup1-netb"and "talk out that interface to the client. The client will see an incoming connection from 192.168.3.10, perform a reverse DNS lookup and determine the name to be "backup1-netb". It will check it's bp.conf file for that nameif it doesn't find it, the job will fail with a status 59, if it DOES find it, it will start to transmit backup data back to 192.168.3.10. Even if the media server has multiple interfaces on a subnet, it will pick one to use, and talk to the client via that interface, the client will still reply back to the interface that queried it. couple questions for you.what is the purpose of the extra connections? to have a foot on multiple VLANs to keep backup traffic off of routers? so each interface is a difference subnet? in which case you really want to make sure you have routing disabled on the media servers..or just for more bandwidth on a given subnet? in which case you should probably be using some sort of trunking/multipathing/teaming, etc. Paul -- -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin, Jonathan (Contractor)Sent: September 11, 2006 3:43 PMTo: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.eduSubject: [Veritas-bu] Multiple-Nics Ok... so three new media servers with 4 nics each are headed my way in the next few weeks. That's 12 interfaces I've got to worry about! According to the NBU Performance Planning Tuning Guide I should create DNS entries for each interface, and add all interfaces to each server's bp.conf (or registry in windows.) I'm going to get all these values setup and ready to go before the hardware even arrives. backup1 (IP1) backup1-neta (IP2) backup1-netb (IP3) backup1-netc (IP4) backup2 (IP1) backup2-neta (IP2) backup2-netb (IP3) backup2-netc (IP4) backup3 (IP1) backup3-neta (IP2) backup3-netb (IP3) backup3-netc (IP4) So the servers will all talk to each other across the various nics (by looking up the server name) but how do clients know which IP to use? Many of those IPs are going to be on a non-routed "backend" network, which several clients will not have access to. How does the Master / Media server know which nic to use to communicate with the client? Further, how do I tell my jobs which IP to use?! For example, if I have 6 nics on 3 servers in the "back end" will NBU automatically local balance between them? Perhaps I should enable teaming? Any input on how this done properly would be appreciated. Unfortunately the HOSTS file lookup method we use now is unacceptable (and dumb) so I'll have to make this work properly. -Jonathan 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
Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiple-Nics
Title: Message More bandwidth on the same subnet. But to some point to keep data off routers. I've got a dedicated 10/100/1000 Cisco 3750 at my disposal, so I'm going to "max" it out, by passing bottlenecks associated with the rest of the infrastructure's multiple switches connected via (slow) 2Gb fiber connections. I can't run 45 1Gb backups across 3 x 1Gb connected media servers, so I'm going to (at least) run 2 Gigabit nics per Media Server if not more. I was thinking more along the lines of 8 or 9, but I'm using dual nics and I don't think I can trunk 3 nics from two different manufacturers (integrated vs, expansion.) Further, I'm not convinces that trunking is actually going to give me faster backups. My NBU Domain will look more like... 10.1.1.x Master10.1.2.x, 10.1.2.x 10.1.1.x Media 10.1.2.x, 10.1.2.x 10.1.1.x Media 10.1.2.x, 10.1.2.x Most clients will simply be slower 10/100 connected to the 10.1.1.x. However anything with 50+GB of data will be on BOTH the 10.1.1.x AND the 10.1.2.x. Right now nothing has more than one nic in the "backend" (10.1.2.x for this example.) Which server writes where is heavily controlled by hosts files, which is a method I intend to improve. Hrm... -Jonathan From: Paul Keating [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 3:58 PMTo: Martin, Jonathan (Contractor); veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.eduSubject: RE: [Veritas-bu] Multiple-Nics servers should talk to each other via the "main" interfaces, hopefully, if your networks and routing are configured properly. ie, if yourSTU specifies "backup2" as the media server, then the master will talk to it via the interface named "media2" How the master server decides which of its interfaces to talk out of is more complicated if there are more than one interface on a given subnet, and they're not trunkedcould cause some "unexpected issues". the clients will talk back to whatever interface a connection is requested from. f'rinstance.backup1 has 4 interfaces for example: backup1 (IP1) - 192.168.1.10/24 backup1-neta (IP2)192.168.2.10/24 backup1-netb (IP3)192.168.3.10/24 backup1-netc (IP4) 192.168.4.10/24 A backup of a client is attempted, and that client has an IP of 192.168.3.16 The media server will select the interface connected to the proper subnet which is "backup1-netb"and "talk out that interface to the client. The client will see an incoming connection from 192.168.3.10, perform a reverse DNS lookup and determine the name to be "backup1-netb". It will check it's bp.conf file for that nameif it doesn't find it, the job will fail with a status 59, if it DOES find it, it will start to transmit backup data back to 192.168.3.10. Even if the media server has multiple interfaces on a subnet, it will pick one to use, and talk to the client via that interface, the client will still reply back to the interface that queried it. couple questions for you.what is the purpose of the extra connections? to have a foot on multiple VLANs to keep backup traffic off of routers? so each interface is a difference subnet? in which case you really want to make sure you have routing disabled on the media servers..or just for more bandwidth on a given subnet? in which case you should probably be using some sort of trunking/multipathing/teaming, etc. Paul -- -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin, Jonathan (Contractor)Sent: September 11, 2006 3:43 PMTo: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.eduSubject: [Veritas-bu] Multiple-Nics Ok... so three new media servers with 4 nics each are headed my way in the next few weeks. That's 12 interfaces I've got to worry about! According to the NBU Performance Planning Tuning Guide I should create DNS entries for each interface, and add all interfaces to each server's bp.conf (or registry in windows.) I'm going to get all these values setup and ready to go before the hardware even arrives. backup1 (IP1) backup1-neta (IP2) backup1-netb (IP3) backup1-netc (IP4) backup2 (IP1) backup2-neta (IP2) backup2-netb (IP3) backup2-netc (IP4) backup3 (IP1) backup3-neta (IP2) backup3-netb (IP3) backup3-netc (IP4) So the servers will all talk to each other across the various nics (by looking up the server name) but how do clients know which IP to use? Many of those IPs are going to be on a non-routed "backend" network, which several clients will not have access to. How does the Master / Media server know which nic to use to communicate with the client? Further, how do I tell my jobs which IP to use?! For example, if I have 6 nics on 3 servers in the "back end" will NBU automatically local balance between them? Perhaps I should enable teaming? Any input on how this done properly would be appreciated. Unfortunately the HOSTS file lookup
[Veritas-bu] Catalog restore error
Anyway to get past this or how to fix this? Welcome to the NetBackup Catalog Recovery Wizard! Please make sure the devices and media that contain catalog disaster recovery data are available Are you ready to continue?(Y/N) Y Please specify the full pathname to the catalog disaster recovery file: /csg01/catalog/CSG_WIRELESS-CATALOG_1156538798_FULL ptclvsbkp01.nmplateaugsm.com_1156538798 All media resources were located Do you want to recover the entire NetBackup catalog? (Y/N) y Catalog recovery is in progress. Please wait... Failed to obtain a job id from job manager: cannot connect on socket (25) Failed to recover catalog (25) Dustin D'Amour Coyote Solutions Group 505.742.0066 www.coyotesolutions.com Relax...it's just an update for the patch to fix the nerf that nerfed the fix for the update of the patch that broke the fix that was fixed. --Author Unkown ...Be not afraid of greatness: some are born great, some achieve greatness, and some have greatness thrust upon them. --William Shakespeare ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Multiple-Nics
As mentioned from an earlier thread, I'm not sure of youruse/need for the multiple interfaces. If some or all these multiple interfaces are available for teaming or bonding, I would do that, and use the REQUIRED_INTERFACE for desired data stream (ip addr) -sj "Martin, Jonathan (Contractor)" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 9/11/2006 1:42 PM Ok... so three new media servers with 4 nics each are headed my way in the next few weeks. That's 12 interfaces I've got to worry about! According to the NBU Performance Planning Tuning Guide I should create DNS entries for each interface, and add all interfaces to each server's bp.conf (or registry in windows.) I'm going to get all these values setup and ready to go before the hardware even arrives. backup1 (IP1) backup1-neta (IP2) backup1-netb (IP3) backup1-netc (IP4) backup2 (IP1) backup2-neta (IP2) backup2-netb (IP3) backup2-netc (IP4) backup3 (IP1) backup3-neta (IP2) backup3-netb (IP3) backup3-netc (IP4) So the servers will all talk to each other across the various nics (by looking up the server name) but how do clients know which IP to use? Many of those IPs are going to be on a non-routed "backend" network, which several clients will not have access to. How does the Master / Media server know which nic to use to communicate with the client? Further, how do I tell my jobs which IP to use?! For example, if I have 6 nics on 3 servers in the "back end" will NBU automatically local balance between them? Perhaps I should enable teaming? Any input on how this done properly would be appreciated. Unfortunately the HOSTS file lookup method we use now is unacceptable (and dumb) so I'll have to make this work properly. -Jonathan ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Display summary of volume contents?
I've got some volumes that are assigned in the volume database, but have no images in the media database (bpmedialist says id not found). I'd like to gather some information about what's on the tape (Is it really netbackup? When/what is on the images...) I assume they're old (expired) given the 'last mount' date and the pool, but I don't know why it's still assigned in the volume database. I tried 'bpmedialist -mcontents -m id' to see if it would mount and display what's actually there, but it just spits out an error message very quickly (before any tape movement). Could not obtain report from host nbuserv, requested media id was not found in NB media database and/or MM volume database Well, yes. I know it's not there. I just want a summary of the contents. Obviously I could mount it by hand in a tape and start poking around with 'tar' and such, but I was hoping I could run a netbackup command to get me the same information. Is there such a command? Thanks! -- 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 6.0 Performance Very Slow
We saw a much bigger improvement than 10%. Out of the box we were only achieving 18MB/s when backing up a test database. After playing with buffers we were achieving between 75 and 80MB/s. We increased:- Client buffer to 128MB NUMBER_DATA_BUFFERS to 64 NET_BUFFER_SZ to 528384. The biggest gain was with the NUMBER_DATA_BUFFERS. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of DaveSent: Tuesday, 12 September 2006 4:09 amTo: 'Ganapathy G'; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.eduSubject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup 6.0 Performance Very Slow .. Performance tuning (increasing buffers and sizes) can give you about 10% better back up speed, but if you are only getting 6MB/sec then something is seriously wrong with your hardware strategy. Also, you dont mention if this is Windows or Unix. .. ** This electronic email and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. The views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of the Christchurch City Council. If you are not the correct recipient of this email please advise the sender and delete. Christchurch City Council http://www.ccc.govt.nz ** ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Flashbackup and Database clients
On 9/11/2006 8:24 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: will flashbackup help speedup my lotus notes database agent backups? No. .../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
[Veritas-bu] Legato vs NBu
I've been using NBU 5.1 and below for several years. I'm brand new to NW. Just had a training class in NW 7.3. My shop will need to use both for several reasons. From what I seen thus far -- and I'll try not to be an NBU bigot -- is that the NBU interface is one package and easier to use. NW 7.3 interfaces are separate tools and are clumsy. Perhaps I'll be less clumsy with time. NBU appears to be more master server centric and NW more client focused. One really great thing about NW 7.3 is the ability to set a complete exclude list at the master server as opposed to each client. I don't know how many registries I've had to change by hand or at the client options on the master. Both products indeed have +/- are each have weakness/strengths. I believe cost is relatively the same. NW licensing is cumbersome and can lead to confusion but locks licenses to node. Veritas tracks licenses but holds you to an honor system. NBU you need to track each client somehow on a spreadsheet as not to go over your legal limit. I'll end up backing up my Legato NSR master server with my NBU system and vice versa for best of both worlds. AS long as each product helps to get lost files and systems back, I'm happy as an IT, Business Continuity/DR guy. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Legato vs NBu
I'll end up backing up my Legato NSR master server with my NBU system and vice versa for best of both worlds. Both Networker and Netbackup have the equivalent of live databases at their core. Backing them up without the appropriate support (which the competing product would not have) leaves a risk of missing data or corruption. -- 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
