Re: [Veritas-bu] Possible to exclude Shadow Copy ComponentsfromALL_LOCAL_DRIVES?
Yea, that's the one! --- W. Curtis Preston Backup Blog @ www.backupcentral.com VP Data Protection, GlassHouse Technologies -Original Message- From: WEAVER, Simon (external) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2007 10:45 PM To: Curtis Preston; Conner, Neil; Justin Piszcz Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] Possible to exclude Shadow Copy ComponentsfromALL_LOCAL_DRIVES? Status 71 - None of the Files exist Curtis :-) ! Reading this thread, there seems to be either a lack of understand on the imporantance of Shadow Copy Components. My recommendation is that you leave well alone. If you do A_L_Drives, then a Win2k3 box WILL include this by default. If your policy is configured for C:, E:, F: ect then its NOT included. We had a site that EXCLUDED Shadow Copy Components for their AD Servers... And then wondered why they could not be restored ! It should NOT cause a failure if you have your environment configured correctly. For example, all my Win2k3 Servers are in a specific policy. If you mix and match Win2k3 servers with a Win2k server in the same policy, then you will get failures. This is because VSS is not known by Windows 2000 or NT. If you are asking for VSS to be turned off (or disabled on the client), then its asking for trouble. Also, in case it was not mentioned, from the Master Server, goto Host Properties, click on the master, then right click your master server name and goto Properties. From the Client Attributes Tab, you can add a client name (say Client1) and then click on the tab called Windows Open File Backup. From here you can configure if Netbackup uses the Veritas VSP or Microsoft Shadow Copy Service). If its unticked, it will not be used. But remember, even if this is NOT ticked, the Shadow Copy Component contians critical system and registry files for the Win2k3 Servers. Therefore it is needed. May I suggest you read this... http://seer.support.veritas.com/docs/272538.htm and this http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/271828.htm although would hope the 2nd does not apply to you now :-) HTH - sorry if there is a duplication here on previous posts, but gotta dash ! Regards Simon Weaver 3rd Line Technical Support Windows Domain Administrator EADS Astrium Limited, B23AA IM (DCS) Anchorage Road, Portsmouth, PO3 5PU Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Curtis Preston Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2007 6:26 AM To: Conner, Neil; Justin Piszcz Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Possible to exclude Shadow Copy ComponentsfromALL_LOCAL_DRIVES? That hasn't been my experience. If you configure a drive F: and there isn't an F:, you get a job that fails with no such drive. I don't like failures. My opinion is that ALL_LOCAL_DRIVES is a good thing, and backing up an extra GB or too is a small price to pay. The risk of what happens when you DON'T use it outweighs the value you're gaining by skipping those few GB. 200 clients backing up 2 extra GB = one tape ($75). Big deal. Not having a backup for a drive you need because you forgot to include it? That's a whole lot more than $75. That could be an RPE (resume producing event). --- W. Curtis Preston Backup Blog @ www.backupcentral.com VP Data Protection, GlassHouse Technologies -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Conner, Neil Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2007 3:39 PM To: Justin Piszcz Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Possible to exclude Shadow Copy Components fromALL_LOCAL_DRIVES? Don't use ALL_LOCAL_DRIVES then. Specify C: D: E: ... instead. List all the drives possibly in use for all the clients in the policy - clients with fewer drives configured won't complain. Neil -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Justin Piszcz Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2007 3:24 PM To: Curtis Preston Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Possible to exclude Shadow Copy Components from ALL_LOCAL_DRIVES? Already tried to exclude Shadow Copy Components:\ and System_State:\ no go for either, its not needed in my environment, is 1-3GB and sometimes causes failures with various clients, its a waste of time/resources and it will never be needed. I have never had any luck excluding it though. On Tue, 24 Jul 2007, Curtis Preston wrote: OH! That's not what you said... So you want an exclude pattern to exclude the registry. Not sure if you can do that. Another question is: why? It's not that big. --- W. Curtis Preston Backup Blog @ www.backupcentral.com VP Data Protection, GlassHouse Technologies -Original Message- From: Justin Piszcz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2007 3:20 PM To: Curtis Preston Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re:
Re: [Veritas-bu] Possible to exclude Shadow CopyComponentsfromAL L_LOCAL_DRIVES?
No probs :-) - I agree, hate to see errors when they are not needed Regards Simon Weaver 3rd Line Technical Support Windows Domain Administrator EADS Astrium Limited, B23AA IM (DCS) Anchorage Road, Portsmouth, PO3 5PU Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Curtis Preston Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2007 6:52 AM To: WEAVER, Simon (external); Conner, Neil; Justin Piszcz Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Possible to exclude Shadow CopyComponentsfromALL_LOCAL_DRIVES? Yea, that's the one! --- W. Curtis Preston Backup Blog @ www.backupcentral.com VP Data Protection, GlassHouse Technologies -Original Message- From: WEAVER, Simon (external) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2007 10:45 PM To: Curtis Preston; Conner, Neil; Justin Piszcz Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] Possible to exclude Shadow Copy ComponentsfromALL_LOCAL_DRIVES? Status 71 - None of the Files exist Curtis :-) ! Reading this thread, there seems to be either a lack of understand on the imporantance of Shadow Copy Components. My recommendation is that you leave well alone. If you do A_L_Drives, then a Win2k3 box WILL include this by default. If your policy is configured for C:, E:, F: ect then its NOT included. We had a site that EXCLUDED Shadow Copy Components for their AD Servers... And then wondered why they could not be restored ! It should NOT cause a failure if you have your environment configured correctly. For example, all my Win2k3 Servers are in a specific policy. If you mix and match Win2k3 servers with a Win2k server in the same policy, then you will get failures. This is because VSS is not known by Windows 2000 or NT. If you are asking for VSS to be turned off (or disabled on the client), then its asking for trouble. Also, in case it was not mentioned, from the Master Server, goto Host Properties, click on the master, then right click your master server name and goto Properties. From the Client Attributes Tab, you can add a client name (say Client1) and then click on the tab called Windows Open File Backup. From here you can configure if Netbackup uses the Veritas VSP or Microsoft Shadow Copy Service). If its unticked, it will not be used. But remember, even if this is NOT ticked, the Shadow Copy Component contians critical system and registry files for the Win2k3 Servers. Therefore it is needed. May I suggest you read this... http://seer.support.veritas.com/docs/272538.htm and this http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/271828.htm although would hope the 2nd does not apply to you now :-) HTH - sorry if there is a duplication here on previous posts, but gotta dash ! Regards Simon Weaver 3rd Line Technical Support Windows Domain Administrator EADS Astrium Limited, B23AA IM (DCS) Anchorage Road, Portsmouth, PO3 5PU Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Curtis Preston Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2007 6:26 AM To: Conner, Neil; Justin Piszcz Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Possible to exclude Shadow Copy ComponentsfromALL_LOCAL_DRIVES? That hasn't been my experience. If you configure a drive F: and there isn't an F:, you get a job that fails with no such drive. I don't like failures. My opinion is that ALL_LOCAL_DRIVES is a good thing, and backing up an extra GB or too is a small price to pay. The risk of what happens when you DON'T use it outweighs the value you're gaining by skipping those few GB. 200 clients backing up 2 extra GB = one tape ($75). Big deal. Not having a backup for a drive you need because you forgot to include it? That's a whole lot more than $75. That could be an RPE (resume producing event). --- W. Curtis Preston Backup Blog @ www.backupcentral.com VP Data Protection, GlassHouse Technologies -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Conner, Neil Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2007 3:39 PM To: Justin Piszcz Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Possible to exclude Shadow Copy Components fromALL_LOCAL_DRIVES? Don't use ALL_LOCAL_DRIVES then. Specify C: D: E: ... instead. List all the drives possibly in use for all the clients in the policy - clients with fewer drives configured won't complain. Neil -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Justin Piszcz Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2007 3:24 PM To: Curtis Preston Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Possible to exclude Shadow Copy Components from ALL_LOCAL_DRIVES? Already tried to exclude Shadow Copy Components:\ and System_State:\ no go for either, its not needed in my environment, is 1-3GB and sometimes causes failures with various clients, its a waste of time/resources and it will never be
[Veritas-bu] Corrupt file system on Solaris 9. NetBackup 6.0 MP4
Hi Gang, I am hoping one of the NetBackup/SUN UNIX Guru's might be able to help here. We have a strange issue here at the moment. We have created a separate file system for NetBackup on /opt/openv. The /opt/openv filesystem filled with logs in the /opt/openv/logs directory. When doing a fsck on the file system, there seemed to be some of the files which were hurt. When starting NetBackup, we are told that the NB_dbsrv must be running for NetBackup to start. [EMAIL PROTECTED] # netbackup start NetBackup will not run without /usr/openv/db/bin/NB_dbsrv running NetBackup Notification Service started. NetBackup Enterprise Media Manager started. NetBackup Resource Broker started. NetBackup request daemon started. NetBackup compatibility daemon started. NetBackup Job Manager started. NetBackup Policy Execution Manager started. NetBackup Service Layer started. NetBackup Bare Metal Restore daemon started. NetBackup Vault daemon started. NetBackup is not configured for clustering. NetBackup Service Monitor started. [EMAIL PROTECTED] blocked::mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] # [EMAIL PROTECTED] # /usr/openv/db/bin/NB_dbsrv ld.so.1: dbsrv9: fatal: libdbserv9_r.so: open failed: No such file or directory Killed [EMAIL PROTECTED] blocked::mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] # [EMAIL PROTECTED] # cd ../db/lib [EMAIL PROTECTED] blocked::mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] # ls -la total 73444 drwxr-xr-x 2 root bin 1024 Jul 24 16:02 . drwxr-xr-x 12 root bin 512 Jul 25 09:06 .. -rw-r--r-- 1 root other18701824 Jul 24 15:53 ck lrwxrwxrwx 1 root bin 15 Jul 24 16:02 libdbaes_r.so - libdbaes_r.so.1 -r-xr-xr-x 1 root bin25672 Apr 15 2004 libdbaes_r.so.1 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root bin 14 Jul 24 16:02 libdbcis9.so - libdbcis9.so.1 -r-xr-xr-x 1 root bin 566320 Dec 21 2004 libdbcis9.so.1 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root bin 14 Jul 24 16:02 libdbextf.so - libdbextf.so.1 -r-xr-xr-x 1 root bin28268 Dec 21 2004 libdbextf.so.1 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root bin 16 Jul 24 16:02 libdbjodbc9.so - libdbjodbc9.so.1 -r-xr-xr-x 1 root bin 519336 Dec 21 2004 libdbjodbc9.so.1 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root bin 14 Jul 24 16:02 libdblib9.so - libdblib9.so.1 -r-xr-xr-x 1 root bin 856852 Dec 21 2004 libdblib9.so.1 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root bin 16 Jul 24 16:02 libdblib9_r.so - libdblib9_r.so.1 -r-xr-xr-x 1 root bin 877284 Dec 21 2004 libdblib9_r.so.1 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root bin 15 Jul 24 16:02 libdbodbc9.so - libdbodbc9.so.1 -r-xr-xr-x 1 root bin 166488 Dec 21 2004 libdbodbc9.so.1 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root bin 17 Jul 24 16:02 libdbodbc9_n.so - libdbodbc9_n.so.1 -r-xr-xr-x 1 root bin 1030508 Dec 21 2004 libdbodbc9_n.so.1 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root bin 17 Jul 24 16:02 libdbodbc9_r.so - libdbodbc9_r.so.1 -r-xr-xr-x 1 root bin 1052184 Dec 21 2004 libdbodbc9_r.so.1 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root bin 16 Jul 24 16:02 libdbodm9_r.so - libdbodm9_r.so.1 -r-xr-xr-x 1 root bin 256524 Dec 21 2004 libdbodm9_r.so.1 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root bin 17 Jul 24 16:02 libdbserv9_r.so - libdbserv9_r.so.1 -r-xr-xr-x 1 root bin 8857592 Dec 21 2004 libdbserv9_r.so.1 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root bin 16 Jul 24 16:02 libdbtasks9.so - libdbtasks9.so.1 -r-xr-xr-x 1 root bin20992 Dec 21 2004 libdbtasks9.so.1 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root bin 18 Jul 24 16:02 libdbtasks9_r.so - libdbtasks9_r.so.1 -r-xr-xr-x 1 root bin29784 Dec 21 2004 libdbtasks9_r.so.1 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root bin 15 Jul 24 16:02 libdbtool9.so - libdbtool9.so.1 -r-xr-xr-x 1 root bin 1559544 Dec 21 2004 libdbtool9.so.1 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root bin 17 Jul 24 16:02 libdbtool9_r.so - libdbtool9_r.so.1 -r-xr-xr-x 1 root bin 1565980 Dec 21 2004 libdbtool9_r.so.1 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root bin 17 Jul 24 16:02 libdbunic9_r.so - libdbunic9_r.so.1 -r-xr-xr-x 1 root bin 567568 Dec 21 2004 libdbunic9_r.so.1 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root bin 17 Jul 24 16:02 libdbxwin9_r.so - libdbxwin9_r.so.1 -r-xr-xr-x 1 root bin63776 Dec 21 2004 libdbxwin9_r.so.1 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root bin 16 Jul 24 16:02 libmljodbc9.so - libmljodbc9.so.1 -r-xr-xr-x 1 root bin 519336 Dec 21 2004 libmljodbc9.so.1 -r-xr-xr-x 1 root bin58300 Nov 3 2006 libsybackubr.so lrwxrwxrwx 1 root bin 13 Jul 24 16:02 libsybbr.so - libsybbr.so.1 -r-xr-xr-x 1 root bin52888 Dec 21 2004 libsybbr.so.1 [EMAIL PROTECTED] blocked::mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] # Regards, Clem Kruger Telkom SA Ltd ITS Infrastructure Storage Management You're not obligated to win. You're obligated to keep trying to do the best you can every day. ~~ This e-mail and its contents are subject to
Re: [Veritas-bu] Cross Site Clustering
Are you using VCS? We have done a lot of cross site clustering with VCS. One solution is to have a storage unit at each site, and customize the online and offline scripts to change the policy to point to the correct storage unit. Reneé Carlisle ServerWare Corporation _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Shekel, Tal Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2007 7:40 AM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Cross Site Clustering Hi Guys Anyone have any cross site clusters? I was wondering what solution you have in place (if there is one) to ensure the local storage unit always performs the backup or a backup client which is cross site clustered. As you back up the virtual name you follow the clustered instance around by the storage unit is doesnt change dynamically Any ideas or suggestions? Regards Tal * The message is intended for the named addressee only and may not be disclosed to or used by anyone else, nor may it be copied in any way. The contents of this message and its attachments are confidential and may also be subject to legal privilege. If you are not the named addressee and/or have received this message in error, please advise us by e-mailing [EMAIL PROTECTED] and delete the message and any attachments without retaining any copies. Internet communications are not secure and COLT does not accept responsibility for this message, its contents nor responsibility for any viruses. No contracts can be created or varied on behalf of COLT Telecommunications, its subsidiaries or affiliates (COLT) and any other party by email Communications unless expressly agreed in writing with such other party. Please note that incoming emails will be automatically scanned to eliminate potential viruses and unsolicited promotional emails. For more information refer to www.colt.net or contact us on +44(0)20 7390 3900. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Cross Site Clustering
Hi Tal As long as the DNS (and it's reverse lookup configuration) is working or a good host files exists, you also can backup the physical names, although they're not defined in the bp.conf (or registry). Just add the physical name(s) to the policy and back it up (just make sure you don't backup the same FS as with the virtual name(s) and also make sure that the backup might not take place at the same time (or increase amount of jobs per client). Cheers Flave --- Shekel, Tal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Guys Anyone have any cross site clusters? I was wondering what solution you have in place (if there is one) to ensure the local storage unit always performs the backup or a backup client which is cross site clustered. As you back up the virtual name you follow the clustered instance around by the storage unit is doesn't change dynamically Any ideas or suggestions? Regards Tal * The message is intended for the named addressee only and may not be disclosed to or used by anyone else, nor may it be copied in any way. The contents of this message and its attachments are confidential and may also be subject to legal privilege. If you are not the named addressee and/or have received this message in error, please advise us by e-mailing [EMAIL PROTECTED] and delete the message and any attachments without retaining any copies. Internet communications are not secure and COLT does not accept responsibility for this message, its contents nor responsibility for any viruses. No contracts can be created or varied on behalf of COLT Telecommunications, its subsidiaries or affiliates (COLT) and any other party by email Communications unless expressly agreed in writing with such other party. Please note that incoming emails will be automatically scanned to eliminate potential viruses and unsolicited promotional emails. For more information refer to www.colt.net or contact us on +44(0)20 7390 3900. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu Choose the right car based on your needs. Check out Yahoo! Autos new Car Finder tool. http://autos.yahoo.com/carfinder/ ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Corrupt file system on Solaris 9. NetBackup 6.0 MP4
Clem, In 6.0 on Solaris, I have seen when the logs fill up that sometimes some defunct emm database processes stay out there that don't necessarily show with a bpps -a. I would suggest bringing down all NetBackup services and then do a ps -ef and look for any netbackup, emm, or defunct processes. Make sure that everything is really stopped. Then try restarting NetBackup again. Reneé Carlisle ServerWare Corporation ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Cross Site Clustering
Thanks I think that could cause a error on the passive node as this is for a Oracle cluster I may be able to pull it off if I get the script to check if the db is running locally and exit if it is not Thanks Guys Regards Tal -Original Message- From: Flavio Huerlimann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 25 July 2007 13:30 To: Shekel, Tal; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Cross Site Clustering Hi Tal As long as the DNS (and it's reverse lookup configuration) is working or a good host files exists, you also can backup the physical names, although they're not defined in the bp.conf (or registry). Just add the physical name(s) to the policy and back it up (just make sure you don't backup the same FS as with the virtual name(s) and also make sure that the backup might not take place at the same time (or increase amount of jobs per client). Cheers Flave --- Shekel, Tal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Guys Anyone have any cross site clusters? I was wondering what solution you have in place (if there is one) to ensure the local storage unit always performs the backup or a backup client which is cross site clustered. As you back up the virtual name you follow the clustered instance around by the storage unit is doesn't change dynamically Any ideas or suggestions? Regards Tal * The message is intended for the named addressee only and may not be disclosed to or used by anyone else, nor may it be copied in any way. The contents of this message and its attachments are confidential and may also be subject to legal privilege. If you are not the named addressee and/or have received this message in error, please advise us by e-mailing [EMAIL PROTECTED] and delete the message and any attachments without retaining any copies. Internet communications are not secure and COLT does not accept responsibility for this message, its contents nor responsibility for any viruses. No contracts can be created or varied on behalf of COLT Telecommunications, its subsidiaries or affiliates (COLT) and any other party by email Communications unless expressly agreed in writing with such other party. Please note that incoming emails will be automatically scanned to eliminate potential viruses and unsolicited promotional emails. For more information refer to www.colt.net or contact us on +44(0)20 7390 3900. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu Choose the right car based on your needs. Check out Yahoo! Autos new Car Finder tool. http://autos.yahoo.com/carfinder/ * The message is intended for the named addressee only and may not be disclosed to or used by anyone else, nor may it be copied in any way. The contents of this message and its attachments are confidential and may also be subject to legal privilege. If you are not the named addressee and/or have received this message in error, please advise us by e-mailing [EMAIL PROTECTED] and delete the message and any attachments without retaining any copies. Internet communications are not secure and COLT does not accept responsibility for this message, its contents nor responsibility for any viruses. No contracts can be created or varied on behalf of COLT Telecommunications, its subsidiaries or affiliates (COLT) and any other party by email Communications unless expressly agreed in writing with such other party. Please note that incoming emails will be automatically scanned to eliminate potential viruses and unsolicited promotional emails. For more information refer to www.colt.net or contact us on +44(0)20 7390 3900. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Possible to exclude Shadow Copy ComponentsfromALL_LOCAL_DRIVES?
-- -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Curtis Preston Sent: July 25, 2007 1:26 AM To: Conner, Neil; Justin Piszcz Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Possible to exclude Shadow Copy ComponentsfromALL_LOCAL_DRIVES? That hasn't been my experience. If you configure a drive F: and there isn't an F:, you get a job that fails with no such drive. I don't like failures. Incorrect. If you specify F:\ a the only entry in the backup selection list and it does not exist, you will get a status 71. If you specify C:\, D:\ and F:\, and the system has a C and D drive, but no F drive, you will not get a failure. My opinion is that ALL_LOCAL_DRIVES is a good thing, and backing up an extra GB or too is a small price to pay. The risk of what happens when you DON'T use it outweighs the value you're gaining by skipping those few GB. 200 clients backing up 2 extra GB = one tape ($75). Big deal. Not having a backup for a drive you need because you forgot to include it? That's a whole lot more than $75. That could be an RPE (resume producing event). If anyone is still running one of the affected MP levels, there was an issue where netbackup would backup directory structure but no data, and explicitly specifying the drive letters was a documented work around for that issue. Paul 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] Possible to exclude Shadow Copy ComponentsfromALL_LOCAL_DRIVES?
On Wed, 25 Jul 2007, Paul Keating wrote: -- -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Curtis Preston Sent: July 25, 2007 1:26 AM To: Conner, Neil; Justin Piszcz Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Possible to exclude Shadow Copy ComponentsfromALL_LOCAL_DRIVES? That hasn't been my experience. If you configure a drive F: and there isn't an F:, you get a job that fails with no such drive. I don't like failures. Incorrect. If you specify F:\ a the only entry in the backup selection list and it does not exist, you will get a status 71. If you specify C:\, D:\ and F:\, and the system has a C and D drive, but no F drive, you will not get a failure. You will if you use multi-streaming because each drive is its own stream/job and that is what most people do for speed purposes :) My opinion is that ALL_LOCAL_DRIVES is a good thing, and backing up an extra GB or too is a small price to pay. The risk of what happens when you DON'T use it outweighs the value you're gaining by skipping those few GB. 200 clients backing up 2 extra GB = one tape ($75). Big deal. Not having a backup for a drive you need because you forgot to include it? That's a whole lot more than $75. That could be an RPE (resume producing event). If anyone is still running one of the affected MP levels, there was an issue where netbackup would backup directory structure but no data, and explicitly specifying the drive letters was a documented work around for that issue. Paul 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___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] retentions
Ed, I 100% agree with what you've said below. For my traditional and small environment (only about 550 servers), what I've outlined is extremely useful, especially since it works for both Netbackup and Backup Exec clients in a similar manner. And no, a single report will never be able to get you all the information you need (for example, there a second NBU specific report that gets at least a little closer to giving accurate results on what you describe below in interpreting schedules and report on backup success, believe they call it client_sla_summary_report or something). These reports don't replace one of my major functions, which is to follow-up and design a lot of those said one-offs. I certainly wouldn't want to be without the reports though, now that I know the value of them. My single biggest concern is the interpretation of these reports, and being able to explain without a doubt why an entry is or isn't in them. Thanks for the comments Ed. Cheers, Jon -Original Message- From: Ed Wilts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2007 5:19 PM To: Dyck, Jonathan; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] retentions This doesn't really address all of the issues. In order for this to work, you have to know what the schedule of the jobs are supposed to be. We've got a ton of backups that only run monthly and another ton that only run semi-annually. Unless I sit down with a calendar, telling when the last full backup was and comparing that to what it should be is not going to be trivial. What's important to know is not when the last backup was, but when the last backup was *supposed to be*. To do that, you need to dig into the scheduler and that is where it gets tough. For one client having a weekly full is supposed to be normal. For another, I may not try to back it for 6 months and that's perfectly normal. Reports like this are great if you have a simple environment and everybody does your standard daily/weekly/monthly style backups. Not everybody does their weekly fulls on a weekend and incremental during the week and calls it a day. Any backup software can do that. I've got similar issues with Aptare's projections for tape consumption. In our environment it's absolutely useless since it's based on the day of the week and not on the NetBackup schedules. If it really wanted to a fantastic job (hint, hint), dig into the policies and schedules, its own historical database, and realize that the 2TB backup I did 6 months ago will be done again. I've got about 100TB of storage on a semi-annual backup schedule. To be able to get accurate estimates of those jobs coming up would be sweet... Again, there's no point in telling me when the last backup was. What I want to know is if the backups are getting done when they're supposed to be done. This gets even more complicated when you've got multiple policies for the same client - something that in some cases you *have* to do. Backup reporting and auditing is hard. StorageConsole does a good job at what it's attempted to bite off but it could still get better. And yes, I realize that our environment is non-traditional and that sometimes we're just not going to get a solution unless we write it ourselves. .../Ed -- Ed Wilts, Mounds View, MN, USA mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] I GoodSearch for Bundles Of Love: http://www.goodsearch.com/?charityid=821118 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:veritas-bu- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dyck, Jonathan Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2007 2:37 PM To: Wayne T Smith; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] retentions Just to chime in on the Aptare reports... They have an automated report (out of the box, but not really) you can cron/windows schedule to run that will give you the following details on full backups... (hope your screens large enough to make out the headings...). Great way to stop sys admins bugging you about last successful backups. LATEST FULL BACKUP LAST 60 DAYS CLIENT SERVER LAST FULL MBYTES FILES AVG MBYTES AVG FILES -- -- - -- - -- - With a little fiddling, you can get something that looks like the following all in one email... 1) Missing Backups (from last window any scheduled backup that has yet to run or has failed) 2) Last successful full backup attempt 3) Any skipped files during last backup Get the right person on a DL for an email, and you're laughing. Cheers, Jon -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Wayne T Smith Sent: Friday, July 20, 2007 12:29 PM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] retentions I, too, agree the 2-week retention should be
Re: [Veritas-bu] DSSU on Nexsan MAID-enabled devices?
I believe 6.5 is supposed to have exclusive support for this(?) if I recall seeing something about it in their 6.5 detail/PDFs. On Wed, 25 Jul 2007, Ed Wilts wrote: The Nexsan SATAbeast has some built in maid-features like parking the heads, slowing the drive rotation, and powering down a drive. Has anybody actually enabled any of these features when using them for DSSU space? I'm curious to see how fast the drives will spin back up and if that will trigger a host time-out first or not. As VTLs, I would expect the timeouts to be longer, but for DSSUs, it's simply a file open.We're looking at a SATAbeast for both Solaris and Windows media servers. Any thoughts on this would be appreciated. Thanks, ./Ed -- Ed Wilts, Mounds View, MN, USA mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] I GoodSearch for Bundles Of Love: http://www.goodsearch.com/?charityid=821118 ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] NBU 6 MP4 on RHEL5 Client:Installation problem
As everyone is telling you, you need xinetd settings. Not a big deal. HOWEVER! This install is for linux 2.4 kernel, and RHEL5 is 2.6. Not a big deal, except the gcc changed. You have to make sure you have all the gcc 2.96 compatibility packages installed for legacy support. -Andrew Stueve rizalman_almasi wrote: Dears.. I'm new to the Symantec Netbackup. My environment consists of one master that is run on Windows Server 2000 (NBU 6 MP4). I have a problem with one of my client that used RHEL5. The client installation seems not succesful. This is log that I got from install trace: VERITAS Installation Script Copyright 1993 - 2005 VERITAS Software Corporation, All Rights Reserved. Installing NetBackup Client Software NOTE: To install NetBackup Server software, insert the appropriate NetBackup Server cdrom. Do you wish to continue? [y,n] (y) y Do you want to install the NetBackup client software for this client? [y,n] (y) y OS Level Options 1. IBMzSeriesLinux2.4.21 2. RedHat2.4 q To quit from this script If your Operating System is a newer level than those listed, choose the highest level. Enter Choice [1 - 2] 2 This package will install Linux/RedHat2.4 client. This package will install NetBackup client 6.0. Enter the name of the NetBackup server : mtx2backup Would you like to use ams as the configured name of the NetBackup client? [y,n] (y) y openv/ openv/lib/ openv/lib/libVmangle.so openv/lib/libVnbatST.so_new openv/lib/libVnbat.so openv/lib/libVnbatST64.so_new openv/lib/libVnbat64.so openv/lib/libVcvcomb.so openv/lib/libVcvcombMT.so openv/lib/libVxSS_helper.so_new openv/lib/libVxSS_helperMT.so openv/lib/libVcvcomb64.so openv/lib/libVcvcombMT64.so openv/lib/libVxSS_helper64.so_new openv/lib/libVxSS_helperMT64.so openv/lib/libvnoauth.so_new openv/lib/libvnoauth64.so_new openv/lib/libvopie.so_new openv/lib/libvopie64.so_new openv/lib/libVnbconf.so_new openv/lib/libVnbconfMT.so openv/lib/libVnbconf64.so_new openv/lib/libVnbconfMT64.so openv/lib/libcatbackup.so openv/lib/libcatbackupMT.so openv/lib/libSigScheduleJNI.so openv/lib/libubs.so openv/lib/libdbsb.so openv/lib/libxbsa.so openv/lib/libxbsa64.so openv/lib/libnbbeclass.so openv/lib/libnbbestdutl.so openv/lib/libnbbedscomn.so openv/lib/libxm.so openv/lib/libubsMT.so openv/lib/libnbbeclassMT.so openv/lib/map/ openv/lib/map/libdisk.so openv/lib/map/librawp.so openv/lib/libnbbestdutlMT.so openv/lib/libnbbedscomnMT.so openv/lib/libxbsaMT.so openv/lib/libxbsaMT64.so openv/lib/libdbsbMT.so openv/lib/libVcvcomb_noul.so openv/lib/libVnbconf_noul.so openv/lib/libVcvcomb64_noul.so openv/lib/libVnbconf64_noul.so openv/lib/libvxACE.so.3 openv/lib/libvxACEST.so.3 openv/lib/libvxicui18n.so openv/lib/libvxicudata.so openv/lib/libvxicuuc.so openv/lib/libvxstlport.so openv/lib/libvxstlportST.so openv/lib/libvxustdio.so openv/lib/libvxxml4c.so openv/lib/libvxxml4cST.so openv/lib/libvxicui18nST.so_new openv/lib/libvxicudataST.so_new openv/lib/libvxicuucST.so_new openv/lib/libvxustdioST.so_new openv/lib/libvxexticu.so openv/lib/libvxlis.so openv/lib/libvxul.so openv/lib/libvxexticuST.so_new openv/lib/libvxlisST.so_new openv/lib/libvxulST.so_new openv/lib/libmap.so openv/lib/libvfutil.so openv/netbackup/ openv/netbackup/bin/ openv/netbackup/bin/bpbkar openv/netbackup/bin/bpcd_new openv/netbackup/bin/bpdynamicclient openv/netbackup/bin/bpfilter openv/netbackup/bin/bpbackup openv/netbackup/bin/bprestore openv/netbackup/bin/bplist openv/netbackup/bin/bpclimagelist openv/netbackup/bin/bpclntcmd openv/netbackup/bin/bphdb openv/netbackup/bin/bpmount openv/netbackup/bin/bpfis openv/netbackup/bin/merge_auth_templates openv/netbackup/bin/bpjava-msvc openv/netbackup/bin/bpjava-usvc openv/netbackup/bin/bp openv/netbackup/bin/mtfrd openv/netbackup/bin/bpnbat openv/netbackup/bin/vxss_db_paths openv/netbackup/bin/bmrsavecfg openv/netbackup/bin/bmrsetupclient openv/netbackup/bin/vxlogcfg openv/netbackup/bin/vxlogmgr openv/netbackup/bin/vxlogview openv/netbackup/bin/bmrc openv/netbackup/bin/private/ openv/netbackup/bin/private/nblogcfg openv/netbackup/bin/private/nbloggen openv/netbackup/bin/private/nblogmgr openv/netbackup/bin/private/nblogview openv/netbackup/bin/bptpcinfo openv/netbackup/bin/bpps openv/netbackup/bin/bp.kill_all openv/netbackup/nblog.conf.template openv/bin/ openv/bin/vauth_testd openv/bin/vauth_util openv/bin/vauth_test openv/bin/vopie_util openv/bin/vopied openv/bin/vnetd_new openv/var/ openv/var/auth/ openv/var/auth/template.methods.txt openv/var/auth/template.methods_allow.txt openv/var/auth/template.methods_deny.txt openv/var/auth/template.names_allow.txt openv/var/auth/template.names_deny.txt openv/var/vnetd/ openv/var/vnetd/inetd_bpcd.txt openv/var/vnetd/inetd_bpjava-msvc.txt
[Veritas-bu] NBU 6.0 - Patience required
We upgraded to 6.0MP4 from 5.1 a little over a month ago. In general I think it's better than 5.1, but has anyone else noticed that certain operations take longer? Running vmoprcmd takes 90 seconds on our systems now whereas it used to take a couple of seconds before. Also, getting the media server list in 'host porperties' in the GUI takes 3-4 minutes. Anyone else finding that using 6.0 is a lesson in patience? Jack L. Forester, Jr. UNIX Systems Administrator, Stf Lockheed Martin Information Technology (304) 625-3946 ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] NBU 6.0 - Patience required
MP4 fixed all of my issues, after that if I had the problem, re-installing or deleting/re-adding the media server seemed to help. It is hard to explain but the end result is vmoprcmd timed out and failed, if yours is working after 30 seconds, then I am not sure what could be causing that. It makes sense it takes longer to run though because it has to talk to the master server to get that information. Justin. On Wed, 25 Jul 2007, Allen, Jimmy wrote: What is the bug and how do we fix it? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Justin Piszcz Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2007 1:01 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Forester, Jack L; NetBackup List Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NBU 6.0 - Patience required I noticed there is a bug, in some cases, if NBEMM screws up, vmoprcmd can take a very long time and possibly time out FYI. Justin. On Wed, 25 Jul 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I did notice that vmoprcmd does take slightly longer to run, but for me its only about 15 second difference. It appears that running it in 6 generates better formatted output with more info, which may account for some extra time. But in general I have noticed that operations in the Java Console do take longer to return results. Jared M. Seaton Recovery Administrator Mylan Laboratories Inc. 304-554-5926 Forester, Jack L [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 07/25/2007 01:05 PM To NetBackup List veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu cc Subject [Veritas-bu] NBU 6.0 - Patience required We upgraded to 6.0MP4 from 5.1 a little over a month ago. In general I think it's better than 5.1, but has anyone else noticed that certain operations take longer? Running vmoprcmd takes 90 seconds on our systems now whereas it used to take a couple of seconds before. Also, getting the media server list in 'host porperties' in the GUI takes 3-4 minutes. Anyone else finding that using 6.0 is a lesson in patience? Jack L. Forester, Jr. UNIX Systems Administrator, Stf Lockheed Martin Information Technology (304) 625-3946 ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu == CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message and all attachments transmitted with it may contain legally privileged, proprietary and/or confidential information intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution, duplication or other use of this message and/or its attachments is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message and its attachments. Thank you. == ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu -- * The contents of this email may be confidential * This e-mail message and any attached files are intended solely for the use of the individual(s) addressed and may contain confidential, proprietary or privileged information. If you received this message in error or are not the intended recipient, please destroy this e-mail message and any attachments or copies. You may not retain, distribute or use any information in this e-mail or any of its attachments. Please inform us of the erroneous delivery by return e-mail. Thank you for your cooperation. == ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Corrupt file system on Solaris 9. NetBackup 6.0 MP4
You could also try fuser /usr/openv/netbackup/bin/* and see what process are being used. Regards, Patrick Whelan VERITAS Certified NetBackup Support Engineer for UNIX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of rcarlisle Sent: 25 July 2007 13:12 To: 'Clem Kruger (C)'; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Corrupt file system on Solaris 9. NetBackup 6.0 MP4 Clem, In 6.0 on Solaris, I have seen when the logs fill up that sometimes some defunct emm database processes stay out there that don't necessarily show with a bpps -a. I would suggest bringing down all NetBackup services and then do a ps -ef and look for any netbackup, emm, or defunct processes. Make sure that everything is really stopped. Then try restarting NetBackup again. Reneé Carlisle ServerWare Corporation ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Priority w/ an External Scheduler?
I have a different way of handling that requirement. --- W. Curtis Preston Backup Blog @ www.backupcentral.com VP Data Protection, GlassHouse Technologies From: Steven L. Sesar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2007 12:31 PM To: Curtis Preston Cc: Greenberg, Katherine (ISD, IT); veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Priority w/ an External Scheduler? The only other justification I can think of for using an external scheduler, is, when there are batch processing operations against, say, Oracle databases, which need to run during your backup window. Using the same batch processing application, you can add a backup to the chain. This is a very specific situation - backups of Oracle databases and batch processing against said databases which need to occur during the same backup window. We toyed with the idea, but in the end, we pushed back on the apps folks to fix their apps, so chains would run quicker and run either before our backups begin, or after they complete. We are currently considering hardware-based snapshot capability and array-based replication, which will give our apps folks back some time for chains to run. --Steve Curtis Preston wrote: While I agree with Justin's response, I really don't like using external schedulers for NetBackup unless absolutely necessary. The only real requirement I can think of that would force me to an external scheduler is multi-host dependencies, because external schedulers are really good at that. I've seen the following justifications: 1. I want a backup job to run exactly at 3 AM. a. You can do that with NBU, good windows, and dedicated resources. 2. I want to tell all my jobs exactly when to run. a. Why? Stop over engineering your backup environment. Let go and let Symantec. ;) You'll be amazed at how well run a NBU environment can be if you just give all your backups the same window, the same resources, and just set priorities. It's a beautiful thing and requires VERY little maintenance. 2. An external scheduler is already hooked into our overall reporting mechanism. a. Lousy excuse to cripple the NBU scheduler. Spend the time necessary to hook NBU into your overall reporting mechanism. Short of the one valid reason I've seen (multi-host dependencies), you'll never approach the level of resource utilization and efficiency that the NetBackup scheduler can give you by using an external scheduler. For example, while NBU can have thousands of queued jobs waiting for resource (to make sure that something is always using the tape drives) without consuming any additional resources, doing that with an external scheduler is impossible. --- W. Curtis Preston Backup Blog @ www.backupcentral.com VP Data Protection, GlassHouse Technologies From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greenberg, Katherine (ISD, IT) Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2007 10:55 AM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Priority w/ an External Scheduler? Have you guys ever used an external scheduler? I'm trying to figure out if that impacts Policy Prioritization or not. Since our backups aren't scheduled thru NetBackup (there are schedules, but no windows) does prioritization come into play or no? We're running 5.1 MP6. TIA, Kate * This communication, including attachments, is for the exclusive use of addressee and may contain proprietary, confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, copying, disclosure, dissemination or distribution is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this communication and destroy all copies. * ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu -- === Steven L. Sesar Lead Operating Systems Programmer/Analyst UNIX Application Services R101 The MITRE Corporation 202 Burlington Road - MS K101 Bedford, MA 01730 tel: (781) 271-7702 fax: (781) 271-2600 mobile: (617) 519-8933 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] === ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Corrupt file system on Solaris 9. NetBackup 6.0 MP4
Hi Clem, Make sure you log a sev 1 with support ASAP if you haven't already. In the mean time ... Might be best to apply MP4 to replace the files, I believe most of the lib ones are in there but make sure they are being updated as one of them is probably corrupt. Otheriwse grab them from the CD. It may start after you have done that. So did fsck repair many files ??? You may also want to run : vxlogmgr -del to clear up the log files if there are a lot of them. But copy some of the new ones just in case support want them. I had a similar issue due to logs filling up disk but this one sounds more serious. Good luck, Dom _ From: Clem Kruger (C) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, 25 July 2007 5:45 PM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Corrupt file system on Solaris 9. NetBackup 6.0 MP4 Hi Gang, I am hoping one of the NetBackup/SUN UNIX Guru's might be able to help here. We have a strange issue here at the moment.We have created a separate file system for NetBackup on /opt/openv. The /opt/openv filesystem filled with logs in the /opt/openv/logs directory. When doing a fsck on the file system, there seemed to be some of the files which were hurt. When starting NetBackup, we are told that the NB_dbsrv must be running for NetBackup to start. [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] # netbackup start NetBackup will not run without /usr/openv/db/bin/NB_dbsrv running NetBackup Notification Service started. NetBackup Enterprise Media Manager started. NetBackup Resource Broker started. NetBackup request daemon started. NetBackup compatibility daemon started. NetBackup Job Manager started. NetBackup Policy Execution Manager started. NetBackup Service Layer started. NetBackup Bare Metal Restore daemon started. NetBackup Vault daemon started. NetBackup is not configured for clustering. NetBackup Service Monitor started. [EMAIL PROTECTED] blocked::mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] # [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] # /usr/openv/db/bin/NB_dbsrv ld.so.1: dbsrv9: fatal: libdbserv9_r.so: open failed: No such file or directory Killed [EMAIL PROTECTED] blocked::mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] # [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] # cd ../db/lib [EMAIL PROTECTED] blocked::mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] # ls -la total 73444 drwxr-xr-x 2 root bin 1024 Jul 24 16:02 . drwxr-xr-x 12 root bin 512 Jul 25 09:06 .. -rw-r--r-- 1 root other18701824 Jul 24 15:53 ck lrwxrwxrwx 1 root bin 15 Jul 24 16:02 libdbaes_r.so - libdbaes_r.so.1 -r-xr-xr-x 1 root bin25672 Apr 15 2004 libdbaes_r.so.1 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root bin 14 Jul 24 16:02 libdbcis9.so - libdbcis9.so.1 -r-xr-xr-x 1 root bin 566320 Dec 21 2004 libdbcis9.so.1 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root bin 14 Jul 24 16:02 libdbextf.so - libdbextf.so.1 -r-xr-xr-x 1 root bin28268 Dec 21 2004 libdbextf.so.1 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root bin 16 Jul 24 16:02 libdbjodbc9.so - libdbjodbc9.so.1 -r-xr-xr-x 1 root bin 519336 Dec 21 2004 libdbjodbc9.so.1 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root bin 14 Jul 24 16:02 libdblib9.so - libdblib9.so.1 -r-xr-xr-x 1 root bin 856852 Dec 21 2004 libdblib9.so.1 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root bin 16 Jul 24 16:02 libdblib9_r.so - libdblib9_r.so.1 -r-xr-xr-x 1 root bin 877284 Dec 21 2004 libdblib9_r.so.1 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root bin 15 Jul 24 16:02 libdbodbc9.so - libdbodbc9.so.1 -r-xr-xr-x 1 root bin 166488 Dec 21 2004 libdbodbc9.so.1 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root bin 17 Jul 24 16:02 libdbodbc9_n.so - libdbodbc9_n.so.1 -r-xr-xr-x 1 root bin 1030508 Dec 21 2004 libdbodbc9_n.so.1 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root bin 17 Jul 24 16:02 libdbodbc9_r.so - libdbodbc9_r.so.1 -r-xr-xr-x 1 root bin 1052184 Dec 21 2004 libdbodbc9_r.so.1 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root bin 16 Jul 24 16:02 libdbodm9_r.so - libdbodm9_r.so.1 -r-xr-xr-x 1 root bin 256524 Dec 21 2004 libdbodm9_r.so.1 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root bin 17 Jul 24 16:02 libdbserv9_r.so - libdbserv9_r.so.1 -r-xr-xr-x 1 root bin 8857592 Dec 21 2004 libdbserv9_r.so.1 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root bin 16 Jul 24 16:02 libdbtasks9.so - libdbtasks9.so.1 -r-xr-xr-x 1 root bin20992 Dec 21 2004 libdbtasks9.so.1 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root bin 18 Jul 24 16:02 libdbtasks9_r.so - libdbtasks9_r.so.1 -r-xr-xr-x 1 root bin29784 Dec 21 2004 libdbtasks9_r.so.1 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root bin 15 Jul 24 16:02 libdbtool9.so - libdbtool9.so.1 -r-xr-xr-x 1 root bin 1559544 Dec 21 2004 libdbtool9.so.1 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root bin 17 Jul 24 16:02 libdbtool9_r.so - libdbtool9_r.so.1 -r-xr-xr-x 1 root bin 1565980 Dec 21 2004 libdbtool9_r.so.1 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root bin 17 Jul 24 16:02 libdbunic9_r.so - libdbunic9_r.so.1 -r-xr-xr-x
Re: [Veritas-bu] Priority w/ an External Scheduler?
Yes - It will still work The jobs will run as user jobs which are prioritised Regards Tal -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Justin Piszcz Sent: 25 July 2007 19:10 To: Greenberg, Katherine (ISD, IT) Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Priority w/ an External Scheduler? On Wed, 25 Jul 2007, Greenberg, Katherine (ISD, IT) wrote: Have you guys ever used an external scheduler? I'm trying to figure out if that impacts Policy Prioritization or not. Since our backups aren't scheduled thru NetBackup (there are schedules, but no windows) does prioritization come into play or no? We're running 5.1 MP6. TIA, Kate * This communication, including attachments, is for the exclusive use of addressee and may contain proprietary, confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, copying, disclosure, dissemination or distribution is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this communication and destroy all copies. * Policy Prioritization is based on the policy itself, so if you kickoff the policy externally it should still keep its priority state (0..999/priority number correct?) Justin. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu * The message is intended for the named addressee only and may not be disclosed to or used by anyone else, nor may it be copied in any way. The contents of this message and its attachments are confidential and may also be subject to legal privilege. If you are not the named addressee and/or have received this message in error, please advise us by e-mailing [EMAIL PROTECTED] and delete the message and any attachments without retaining any copies. Internet communications are not secure and COLT does not accept responsibility for this message, its contents nor responsibility for any viruses. No contracts can be created or varied on behalf of COLT Telecommunications, its subsidiaries or affiliates (COLT) and any other party by email Communications unless expressly agreed in writing with such other party. Please note that incoming emails will be automatically scanned to eliminate potential viruses and unsolicited promotional emails. For more information refer to www.colt.net or contact us on +44(0)20 7390 3900. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Possible to exclude Shadow Copy ComponentsfromALL_LOCAL_DRIVES?
See below. Incorrect. If you specify F:\ a the only entry in the backup selection list and it does not exist, you will get a status 71. If you specify C:\, D:\ and F:\, and the system has a C and D drive, but no F drive, you will not get a failure. You will if you use multi-streaming because each drive is its own stream/job and that is what most people do for speed purposes :) Right. And I almost always use multistreaming for many other reasons. --- W. Curtis Preston Backup Blog @ www.backupcentral.com VP Data Protection, GlassHouse Technologies ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Re: NBU 6 MP4 on RHEL5 Client:Installation problem
Shekel, Tal wrote: Until you have an [x]inetd process running the system wont be able to listen for bpcd connections You can start bpcd in standalone mode (bpcd -standalone) on the client for the time being Attached original message stripped from forum post that will be helpful thanks a lot. +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] NBU 6.0 - Patience required
I noticed there is a bug, in some cases, if NBEMM screws up, vmoprcmd can take a very long time and possibly time out FYI. Justin. On Wed, 25 Jul 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I did notice that vmoprcmd does take slightly longer to run, but for me its only about 15 second difference. It appears that running it in 6 generates better formatted output with more info, which may account for some extra time. But in general I have noticed that operations in the Java Console do take longer to return results. Jared M. Seaton Recovery Administrator Mylan Laboratories Inc. 304-554-5926 Forester, Jack L [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 07/25/2007 01:05 PM To NetBackup List veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu cc Subject [Veritas-bu] NBU 6.0 - Patience required We upgraded to 6.0MP4 from 5.1 a little over a month ago. In general I think it's better than 5.1, but has anyone else noticed that certain operations take longer? Running vmoprcmd takes 90 seconds on our systems now whereas it used to take a couple of seconds before. Also, getting the media server list in 'host porperties' in the GUI takes 3-4 minutes. Anyone else finding that using 6.0 is a lesson in patience? Jack L. Forester, Jr. UNIX Systems Administrator, Stf Lockheed Martin Information Technology (304) 625-3946 ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu == CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message and all attachments transmitted with it may contain legally privileged, proprietary and/or confidential information intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution, duplication or other use of this message and/or its attachments is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message and its attachments. Thank you. == ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Priority w/ an External Scheduler?
Have you guys ever used an external scheduler? I'm trying to figure out if that impacts Policy Prioritization or not. Since our backups aren't scheduled thru NetBackup (there are schedules, but no windows) does prioritization come into play or no? We're running 5.1 MP6. TIA, Kate * This communication, including attachments, is for the exclusive use of addressee and may contain proprietary, confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, copying, disclosure, dissemination or distribution is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this communication and destroy all copies. * ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] NBU 6.0 - Patience required
I did notice that vmoprcmd does take slightly longer to run, but for me its only about 15 second difference. It appears that running it in 6 generates better formatted output with more info, which may account for some extra time. But in general I have noticed that operations in the Java Console do take longer to return results. Jared M. Seaton Recovery Administrator Mylan Laboratories Inc. 304-554-5926 Forester, Jack L [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 07/25/2007 01:05 PM To NetBackup List veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu cc Subject [Veritas-bu] NBU 6.0 - Patience required We upgraded to 6.0MP4 from 5.1 a little over a month ago. In general I think it's better than 5.1, but has anyone else noticed that certain operations take longer? Running vmoprcmd takes 90 seconds on our systems now whereas it used to take a couple of seconds before. Also, getting the media server list in 'host porperties' in the GUI takes 3-4 minutes. Anyone else finding that using 6.0 is a lesson in patience? Jack L. Forester, Jr. UNIX Systems Administrator, Stf Lockheed Martin Information Technology (304) 625-3946 ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu == CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message and all attachments transmitted with it may contain legally privileged, proprietary and/or confidential information intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution, duplication or other use of this message and/or its attachments is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message and its attachments. Thank you. == ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Priority w/ an External Scheduler?
They aren't user jobs, they are run with bpbackup -i. -Original Message- From: Shekel, Tal [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2007 3:26 PM To: Justin Piszcz; Greenberg, Katherine (ISD, IT) Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] Priority w/ an External Scheduler? Yes - It will still work The jobs will run as user jobs which are prioritised Regards Tal -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Justin Piszcz Sent: 25 July 2007 19:10 To: Greenberg, Katherine (ISD, IT) Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Priority w/ an External Scheduler? On Wed, 25 Jul 2007, Greenberg, Katherine (ISD, IT) wrote: Have you guys ever used an external scheduler? I'm trying to figure out if that impacts Policy Prioritization or not. Since our backups aren't scheduled thru NetBackup (there are schedules, but no windows) does prioritization come into play or no? We're running 5.1 MP6. TIA, Kate * This communication, including attachments, is for the exclusive use of addressee and may contain proprietary, confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, copying, disclosure, dissemination or distribution is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this communication and destroy all copies. * Policy Prioritization is based on the policy itself, so if you kickoff the policy externally it should still keep its priority state (0..999/priority number correct?) Justin. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu * The message is intended for the named addressee only and may not be disclosed to or used by anyone else, nor may it be copied in any way. The contents of this message and its attachments are confidential and may also be subject to legal privilege. If you are not the named addressee and/or have received this message in error, please advise us by e-mailing [EMAIL PROTECTED] and delete the message and any attachments without retaining any copies. Internet communications are not secure and COLT does not accept responsibility for this message, its contents nor responsibility for any viruses. No contracts can be created or varied on behalf of COLT Telecommunications, its subsidiaries or affiliates (COLT) and any other party by email Communications unless expressly agreed in writing with such other party. Please note that incoming emails will be automatically scanned to eliminate potential viruses and unsolicited promotional emails. For more information refer to www.colt.net or contact us on +44(0)20 7390 3900. * This communication, including attachments, is for the exclusive use of addressee and may contain proprietary, confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, copying, disclosure, dissemination or distribution is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this communication and destroy all copies. * ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] NBU 6.0 - Patience required
I also agree that things take longer, particularly starting NBConsole on Windows. = Carl Stehman IT Distributed Services Team Pepco Holdings, Inc. 202-331-6619 Pager 301-765-2703 [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 07/25/2007 01:50 PM To Forester, Jack L [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc NetBackup List veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject Re: [Veritas-bu] NBU 6.0 - Patience required I did notice that vmoprcmd does take slightly longer to run, but for me its only about 15 second difference. It appears that running it in 6 generates better formatted output with more info, which may account for some extra time. But in general I have noticed that operations in the Java Console do take longer to return results. Jared M. Seaton Recovery Administrator Mylan Laboratories Inc. 304-554-5926 Forester, Jack L [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 07/25/2007 01:05 PM To NetBackup List veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu cc Subject [Veritas-bu] NBU 6.0 - Patience required We upgraded to 6.0MP4 from 5.1 a little over a month ago. In general I think it's better than 5.1, but has anyone else noticed that certain operations take longer? Running vmoprcmd takes 90 seconds on our systems now whereas it used to take a couple of seconds before. Also, getting the media server list in 'host porperties' in the GUI takes 3-4 minutes. Anyone else finding that using 6.0 is a lesson in patience? Jack L. Forester, Jr. UNIX Systems Administrator, Stf Lockheed Martin Information Technology (304) 625-3946 ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu == CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message and all attachments transmitted with it may contain legally privileged, proprietary and/or confidential information intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution, duplication or other use of this message and/or its attachments is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message and its attachments. Thank you. == ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu This Email message and any attachment may contain information that is proprietary, legally privileged, confidential and/or subject to copyright belonging to Pepco Holdings, Inc. or its affiliates (PHI). This Email is intended solely for the use of the person(s) to which it is addressed. If you are not an intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivery of this Email to the intended recipient(s), you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this Email is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please immediately notify the sender and permanently delete this Email and any copies. PHI policies expressly prohibit employees from making defamatory or offensive statements and infringing any copyright or any other legal right by Email communication. PHI will not accept any liability in respect of such communications. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Priority w/ an External Scheduler?
On Wed, 25 Jul 2007, Greenberg, Katherine (ISD, IT) wrote: Have you guys ever used an external scheduler? I'm trying to figure out if that impacts Policy Prioritization or not. Since our backups aren't scheduled thru NetBackup (there are schedules, but no windows) does prioritization come into play or no? We're running 5.1 MP6. TIA, Kate * This communication, including attachments, is for the exclusive use of addressee and may contain proprietary, confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, copying, disclosure, dissemination or distribution is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this communication and destroy all copies. * Policy Prioritization is based on the policy itself, so if you kickoff the policy externally it should still keep its priority state (0..999/priority number correct?) Justin. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Upgrade NB 6.0 MP3 to MP4
Hi, I'm new to Nb. if I need to upgrade my clients to MP4, do I absolutely need to backup my master server (solaris 9) to MP4 too? or keeping it at mp3 is ok? Thanks, Marc-Andre Labelle +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Upgrade NB 6.0 MP3 to MP4
Yes. Other way not supported. kww -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of malabelle Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2007 12:31 PM To: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Upgrade NB 6.0 MP3 to MP4 Hi, I'm new to Nb. if I need to upgrade my clients to MP4, do I absolutely need to backup my master server (solaris 9) to MP4 too? or keeping it at mp3 is ok? Thanks, Marc-Andre Labelle +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] NBU 6.0 - Patience required
What is the bug and how do we fix it? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Justin Piszcz Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2007 1:01 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Forester, Jack L; NetBackup List Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NBU 6.0 - Patience required I noticed there is a bug, in some cases, if NBEMM screws up, vmoprcmd can take a very long time and possibly time out FYI. Justin. On Wed, 25 Jul 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I did notice that vmoprcmd does take slightly longer to run, but for me its only about 15 second difference. It appears that running it in 6 generates better formatted output with more info, which may account for some extra time. But in general I have noticed that operations in the Java Console do take longer to return results. Jared M. Seaton Recovery Administrator Mylan Laboratories Inc. 304-554-5926 Forester, Jack L [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 07/25/2007 01:05 PM To NetBackup List veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu cc Subject [Veritas-bu] NBU 6.0 - Patience required We upgraded to 6.0MP4 from 5.1 a little over a month ago. In general I think it's better than 5.1, but has anyone else noticed that certain operations take longer? Running vmoprcmd takes 90 seconds on our systems now whereas it used to take a couple of seconds before. Also, getting the media server list in 'host porperties' in the GUI takes 3-4 minutes. Anyone else finding that using 6.0 is a lesson in patience? Jack L. Forester, Jr. UNIX Systems Administrator, Stf Lockheed Martin Information Technology (304) 625-3946 ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu == CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message and all attachments transmitted with it may contain legally privileged, proprietary and/or confidential information intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution, duplication or other use of this message and/or its attachments is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message and its attachments. Thank you. == ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu -- * The contents of this email may be confidential * This e-mail message and any attached files are intended solely for the use of the individual(s) addressed and may contain confidential, proprietary or privileged information. If you received this message in error or are not the intended recipient, please destroy this e-mail message and any attachments or copies. You may not retain, distribute or use any information in this e-mail or any of its attachments. Please inform us of the erroneous delivery by return e-mail. Thank you for your cooperation. == ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Problem connecting Quantum i2000
Has anyone run across this dilemma The following are connected via F/C switch: Quantum i2000 Scalar tape library 6 tape drives IBM RS6000 (Veritas 6.0-mr4 Master server) The switch is: IBM TotalStorage San16B-2 (switch) Problem: no robot ID to use for making ovpass Quantum provided one solution (that worked in Veritas 5) no scsi address available for ovpass so use the scsi address from rmt0 This seems to work until robtest is used then it becomes apparent that there is still a problem- (device mapping) How do I get the correct address for the robot lun. Is this a case that I am using the wrong method or is this a case that I am using the correct method but the device mapping is not functioning correctly Any help will be appreciated -- Sláinte, David Checkout the, sometimes updated, McWilliams family website @ http://davidmcw.tripod.com Get a safer, faster, better web browser @ http://www.mozilla.org/products/firefox/ ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Priority w/ an External Scheduler?
While I agree with Justin's response, I really don't like using external schedulers for NetBackup unless absolutely necessary. The only real requirement I can think of that would force me to an external scheduler is multi-host dependencies, because external schedulers are really good at that. I've seen the following justifications: 1. I want a backup job to run exactly at 3 AM. a. You can do that with NBU, good windows, and dedicated resources. 2. I want to tell all my jobs exactly when to run. a. Why? Stop over engineering your backup environment. Let go and let Symantec. ;) You'll be amazed at how well run a NBU environment can be if you just give all your backups the same window, the same resources, and just set priorities. It's a beautiful thing and requires VERY little maintenance. 3. An external scheduler is already hooked into our overall reporting mechanism. a. Lousy excuse to cripple the NBU scheduler. Spend the time necessary to hook NBU into your overall reporting mechanism. Short of the one valid reason I've seen (multi-host dependencies), you'll never approach the level of resource utilization and efficiency that the NetBackup scheduler can give you by using an external scheduler. For example, while NBU can have thousands of queued jobs waiting for resource (to make sure that something is always using the tape drives) without consuming any additional resources, doing that with an external scheduler is impossible. --- W. Curtis Preston Backup Blog @ www.backupcentral.com VP Data Protection, GlassHouse Technologies From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greenberg, Katherine (ISD, IT) Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2007 10:55 AM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Priority w/ an External Scheduler? Have you guys ever used an external scheduler? I'm trying to figure out if that impacts Policy Prioritization or not. Since our backups aren't scheduled thru NetBackup (there are schedules, but no windows) does prioritization come into play or no? We're running 5.1 MP6. TIA, Kate * This communication, including attachments, is for the exclusive use of addressee and may contain proprietary, confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, copying, disclosure, dissemination or distribution is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this communication and destroy all copies. * ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Upgrade NB 6.0 MP3 to MP4
Looks like you have your answer You should also try keep any db agents at the same MP as the master I have seen issues from this with the Oracle agent -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of malabelle Sent: 25 July 2007 18:31 To: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Upgrade NB 6.0 MP3 to MP4 Hi, I'm new to Nb. if I need to upgrade my clients to MP4, do I absolutely need to backup my master server (solaris 9) to MP4 too? or keeping it at mp3 is ok? Thanks, Marc-Andre Labelle +-- |This was sent by [EMAIL PROTECTED] via Backup Central. |Forward SPAM to [EMAIL PROTECTED] +-- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu * The message is intended for the named addressee only and may not be disclosed to or used by anyone else, nor may it be copied in any way. The contents of this message and its attachments are confidential and may also be subject to legal privilege. If you are not the named addressee and/or have received this message in error, please advise us by e-mailing [EMAIL PROTECTED] and delete the message and any attachments without retaining any copies. Internet communications are not secure and COLT does not accept responsibility for this message, its contents nor responsibility for any viruses. No contracts can be created or varied on behalf of COLT Telecommunications, its subsidiaries or affiliates (COLT) and any other party by email Communications unless expressly agreed in writing with such other party. Please note that incoming emails will be automatically scanned to eliminate potential viruses and unsolicited promotional emails. For more information refer to www.colt.net or contact us on +44(0)20 7390 3900. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] NBU 6.0 - Patience required
I had an issue, pre MP4, of the console on Win taking a good while to open. It started with some MP3 troubles, but MP4 cleared that. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2007 3:27 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Forester, Jack L; NetBackup List Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NBU 6.0 - Patience required I also agree that things take longer, particularly starting NBConsole on Windows. = Carl Stehman IT Distributed Services Team Pepco Holdings, Inc. 202-331-6619 Pager 301-765-2703 [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 07/25/2007 01:50 PM To Forester, Jack L [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc NetBackup List veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject Re: [Veritas-bu] NBU 6.0 - Patience required I did notice that vmoprcmd does take slightly longer to run, but for me its only about 15 second difference. It appears that running it in 6 generates better formatted output with more info, which may account for some extra time. But in general I have noticed that operations in the Java Console do take longer to return results. Jared M. Seaton Recovery Administrator Mylan Laboratories Inc. 304-554-5926 Forester, Jack L [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 07/25/2007 01:05 PM To NetBackup List veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu cc Subject [Veritas-bu] NBU 6.0 - Patience required We upgraded to 6.0MP4 from 5.1 a little over a month ago. In general I think it's better than 5.1, but has anyone else noticed that certain operations take longer? Running vmoprcmd takes 90 seconds on our systems now whereas it used to take a couple of seconds before. Also, getting the media server list in 'host porperties' in the GUI takes 3-4 minutes. Anyone else finding that using 6.0 is a lesson in patience? Jack L. Forester, Jr. UNIX Systems Administrator, Stf Lockheed Martin Information Technology (304) 625-3946 ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu == CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message and all attachments transmitted with it may contain legally privileged, proprietary and/or confidential information intended solely for the use of the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution, duplication or other use of this message and/or its attachments is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message and its attachments. Thank you. == ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu This Email message and any attachment may contain information that is proprietary, legally privileged, confidential and/or subject to copyright belonging to Pepco Holdings, Inc. or its affiliates (PHI). This Email is intended solely for the use of the person(s) to which it is addressed. If you are not an intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivery of this Email to the intended recipient(s), you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this Email is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please immediately notify the sender and permanently delete this Email and any copies. PHI policies expressly prohibit employees from making defamatory or offensive statements and infringing any copyright or any other legal right by Email communication. PHI will not accept any liability in respect of such communications. smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
