Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release?
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 12:11 PM, Rice, Robert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Just wondering what the consensus is on the most recent stable release of > NBU for Solaris 10 using LTO4? > 6.5.1 with a couple of Engineering binaries is a good stable environment today. We were there for over 6 months and it was fairly solid. There are some features that are in 6.5.2 - if you need them, you don't have much choice. Be aware that you may need some engineering binaries for 6.5.2 as well. .../Ed -- Ed Wilts, Mounds View, MN, USA [EMAIL PROTECTED] If I've helped you, please make a donation to my favorite charity at http://firstgiving.com/edwilts ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release?
Ditto for us here at the Mountain. Steve Hudson Enterprise Storage Iron Mountain 745 Atlantic Ave Boston, MA 02111 Phone: (617) 535-2849 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit the new www.ironmountain.com Tour Iron Mountain From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Lightner Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2008 4:39 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release? We've been using 6.5.1 on HP-UX and other than the error messages for vaulting it seems relatively stable. We've NOT upgraded to 6.5.2 or 6.5.2a mainly due to all the issues reported on this list. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2008 3:35 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release? I'll offer up: Not 6.5.1, 6.5.2 or v6.5.2A as a limited answer. I've been fighting bugs for 3 weeks on this version (6.5.2A) and their emergency nbpem patch for it fixes a known 9 bugs and there's at least one more (since the latest version doesn't fix my problem either). I upgraded from 6.5.1 since it had a bug, too, on resource allocation. This is on a Sol 8 master server, however. -M From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rice, Robert Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2008 11:11 AM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release? Hi all, Just wondering what the consensus is on the most recent stable release of NBU for Solaris 10 using LTO4? Thanks in advance, Bob -- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail may contain privileged or confidential information and is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the contents of this information is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please reply immediately to the sender that you have received the message in error, and delete it. Thank you. -- The information contained in this email message and its attachments is intended only for the private and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above, unless the sender expressly agrees otherwise. Transmission of email over the Internet is not a secure communications medium. If you are requesting or have requested the transmittal of personal data, as defined in applicable privacy laws by means of email or in an attachment to email you must select a more secure alternate means of transmittal that supports your obligations to protect such personal data. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient and/or you have received this email in error, you must take no action based on the information in this email and you are hereby notified that any dissemination, misuse, copying, or disclosure of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by email and delete the original message.___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release?
6.0MP6 here, LTO-2, LTO-3, LTO-4, Catalog Compression/in some environments, in-line tape copy.. No major issues.. On Wed, 20 Aug 2008, Rice, Robert wrote: > Hi all, > > Just wondering what the consensus is on the most recent stable release of NBU > for Solaris 10 using LTO4? > > Thanks in advance, > Bob > ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release?
We've been using 6.5.1 on HP-UX and other than the error messages for vaulting it seems relatively stable. We've NOT upgraded to 6.5.2 or 6.5.2a mainly due to all the issues reported on this list. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2008 3:35 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release? I'll offer up: Not 6.5.1, 6.5.2 or v6.5.2A as a limited answer. I've been fighting bugs for 3 weeks on this version (6.5.2A) and their emergency nbpem patch for it fixes a known 9 bugs and there's at least one more (since the latest version doesn't fix my problem either). I upgraded from 6.5.1 since it had a bug, too, on resource allocation. This is on a Sol 8 master server, however. -M From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rice, Robert Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2008 11:11 AM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release? Hi all, Just wondering what the consensus is on the most recent stable release of NBU for Solaris 10 using LTO4? Thanks in advance, Bob -- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail may contain privileged or confidential information and is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the contents of this information is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please reply immediately to the sender that you have received the message in error, and delete it. Thank you. -- ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release?
I'll offer up: Not 6.5.1, 6.5.2 or v6.5.2A as a limited answer. I've been fighting bugs for 3 weeks on this version (6.5.2A) and their emergency nbpem patch for it fixes a known 9 bugs and there's at least one more (since the latest version doesn't fix my problem either). I upgraded from 6.5.1 since it had a bug, too, on resource allocation. This is on a Sol 8 master server, however. -M From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rice, Robert Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2008 11:11 AM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release? Hi all, Just wondering what the consensus is on the most recent stable release of NBU for Solaris 10 using LTO4? Thanks in advance, Bob ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Most recent stable release?
Hi all, Just wondering what the consensus is on the most recent stable release of NBU for Solaris 10 using LTO4? Thanks in advance, Bob ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Using Datalink for NetBackup Support
Our environment uses Datalink for support on Netbackup, our Protectier VTL and our STK L700 tape library. For the most part support is like that with any other 3rd party vendor. Sometimes you get a good technician and sometimes you get a bad one. I should also note though that some of the technicians that work for Datalink support use to work at Symantec in Netbackup support. If you get one of them you are lucky since they really know what they are talking about. How do I know this? I use to work at Symantec in Netbackup support as well. +-- |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] Backup Reports in NBU 5.1 - Query on the Data BackedUp!
Yes, when you use the Windows filesystem compression the OS has to uncompress the data before it sends it to NetBackup. Filesystem compression does a wonderful job of slowing down your backups and beating on the disks. - John Nardello From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of WEAVER, Simon (external) Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2008 8:27 AM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Backup Reports in NBU 5.1 - Query on the Data BackedUp! Evening all Wonder if I can seek some clarification. NBU 5.1+MP5+Win2k3 Server Master plus multiple SAN/Clients I went to run a report "Client Backups" and wanted to see how many kb's were written during the backup. According to the Report, 3500984336kb backed up. This is approx 3,500GB or 3.41TB's :-) However, according to Windows itself, it claims that it shows 2.3TB of Data on the volumes. The volumes are compressed, so I wondered if NetBackup Report is showing uncompressed size? Has anyone seen this? Thanks Simon This email (including any attachments) may contain confidential and/or privileged information or information otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately, do not copy this message or any attachments and do not use it for any purpose or disclose its content to any person, but delete this message and any attachments from your system. Astrium disclaims any and all liability if this email transmission was virus corrupted, altered or falsified. - 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.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] MSEO Agent Backup Error
Hi Bill, thanks again for the reply. Really appreciate your help as not many administrator doing MSEO for their environment. I do not have access to the server now, so i cant extract the cgsb.log now. I think there are no communication problems between all my MSEO SAN Media Server and Security Server (Master Server). This is because during installation of MSEO at SAN Media Servers, the installation manage to complete with the key display to prompt user to trust it and also the security server pem record also had an entry of the newly installed SAN Media Server, hence i do believe they are communicating without problem. I also did suspect there might be problems with the MSEO Policy, but what i did was purely copy from the default policy and rename it to another name. At the same time, i've delete rule1 and this, the default rule2 bcomes rule1 and rule3 bcome rule2 instead. In my backup policy's keyphase, i've entered KeyGroup=Keys_01; KeyType=aes128; Compress=lzrw3; This keyphase worked for my master server (Windows) which is also the security server as well, but it hit status 84 when i tried to do the exact same thing on my SAN Media Server regardless of OS. +-- |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] Device configuration issue
What platform are you on? I had a similar problem in Windows, and ended up killing the NetBackup processes to get around this. Simon -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Forester, Jack L Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2008 3:24 PM To: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Device configuration issue Greetings, We're having some problems with device configuration on our media servers. We normally run "tpautoconf -a -v" with great success, but now it seems to think that another device configuration is already in progress. We get the message "Another device configuration is already in progress.". Additionally, when we try to configure the devices manually using tpconfig, there is no confirmation message indicating the device was successfully added. There is also no error message indicating failure. It just silently ignores it. Has anyone else seen this behavior? We had this problem a couple weeks ago, and restarting NetBackup on the master server cured it, however, I'd like to know more about the problem. 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 This email (including any attachments) may contain confidential and/or privileged information or information otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately, do not copy this message or any attachments and do not use it for any purpose or disclose its content to any person, but delete this message and any attachments from your system. Astrium disclaims any and all liability if this email transmission was virus corrupted, altered or falsified. - 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.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Device configuration issue
The master server is Solaris 10. The problem is affecting all media servers...solaris, hp-ux, and windows. I checked for the tpac.lock file on the master, but no joy. Jack L. Forester, Jr. UNIX Systems Administrator, Stf Lockheed Martin Information Technology (304) 625-3946 -Original Message- From: WEAVER, Simon (external) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2008 11:34 AM To: Forester, Jack L; VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] Device configuration issue What platform are you on? I had a similar problem in Windows, and ended up killing the NetBackup processes to get around this. Simon -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Forester, Jack L Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2008 3:24 PM To: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Device configuration issue Greetings, We're having some problems with device configuration on our media servers. We normally run "tpautoconf -a -v" with great success, but now it seems to think that another device configuration is already in progress. We get the message "Another device configuration is already in progress.". Additionally, when we try to configure the devices manually using tpconfig, there is no confirmation message indicating the device was successfully added. There is also no error message indicating failure. It just silently ignores it. Has anyone else seen this behavior? We had this problem a couple weeks ago, and restarting NetBackup on the master server cured it, however, I'd like to know more about the problem. 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 This email (including any attachments) may contain confidential and/or privileged information or information otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately, do not copy this message or any attachments and do not use it for any purpose or disclose its content to any person, but delete this message and any attachments from your system. Astrium disclaims any and all liability if this email transmission was virus corrupted, altered or falsified. - 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.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Backup Reports in NBU 5.1 - Query on the Data Backed Up!
Evening all Wonder if I can seek some clarification. NBU 5.1+MP5+Win2k3 Server Master plus multiple SAN/Clients I went to run a report "Client Backups" and wanted to see how many kb's were written during the backup. According to the Report, 3500984336kb backed up. This is approx 3,500GB or 3.41TB's :-) However, according to Windows itself, it claims that it shows 2.3TB of Data on the volumes. The volumes are compressed, so I wondered if NetBackup Report is showing uncompressed size? Has anyone seen this? Thanks Simon This email (including any attachments) may contain confidential and/or privileged information or information otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately, do not copy this message or any attachments and do not use it for any purpose or disclose its content to any person, but delete this message and any attachments from your system. Astrium disclaims any and all liability if this email transmission was virus corrupted, altered or falsified. - 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.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] verify catalog backup
you can use bprecover with the switch -l which will list the header (at least it allows the Tape to be loaded by NetBackup and verify the content header. Also, bpverify might be useful. I am sorry, I am unsure if it is a feature in 5.0 but it is in 5.1. Also, could this not be done from the GUI within the Master Server (Launch console, click on "catalog" left side of the pane window). Simon -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of X_S Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2008 4:13 PM To: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] verify catalog backup is there a way to read and verify a catalog backup tape? this is for a 5.0 mp5 environment. thanks +-- |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 This email (including any attachments) may contain confidential and/or privileged information or information otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately, do not copy this message or any attachments and do not use it for any purpose or disclose its content to any person, but delete this message and any attachments from your system. Astrium disclaims any and all liability if this email transmission was virus corrupted, altered or falsified. - 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.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] MSEO Agent Backup Error
"Number data buffers" probably isn't the issue. "Could not process the request because somthing was missing from server" and "vmtape error1": Each media server configured with MSEO connects to one or more MSEO security servers at backup and restore time. Check the MSEO log on whatever server you have configured as the MSEO security server for the media server with the 84 error. - "Something missing" isn't real specific but /var/log/cgsb.log (on the MSEO Security server) may provide additional detail - You've probably already executed cgconfig server on the failing media server and that it correctly lists one or more MSEO security servers - You've probably already executed cgadmin add host on the MSEO security server Assuming you don't have a communication issue between the media server and security server there may be an issue with the MSEO policy assigned to this host. Are you using the default MSEO policy or have you created an MSEO policy specifically for this media server? 1) What are the log entires in /var/log/cgsb.log on the MSEO security server? 2) What MSEO policy are you using for this host? Thanks, Bill On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 1:40 AM, dy018 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > > Hi Bill, > > I've tried reducing the buffer size as what you stated but the problem > still persist, do we need to change the NUMBER_DATA_BUFFERS as well? we are > setting at 256 at the moment. > > Regards > > +-- > |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
[Veritas-bu] verify catalog backup
is there a way to read and verify a catalog backup tape? this is for a 5.0 mp5 environment. thanks +-- |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] Veritas NetBackup 6.0 Media Manager SA's Guide
On Wed, 20 Aug 2008, BeDour, Wayne wrote: > > Anyone have the link for the "Veritas NetBackup 6.0 Media Manager SA's > Guide " or one for 6.5 if it is out there? I've been looking on > Symantec's site but am having no luck. > > Thanks in advance... > > > > Wayne BeDour > > Unix System Administrator > > PH: 313-593-9876 > > Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > They are usually all in here: ftp://ftp.nbu.support.veritas.com/pub/support/products/NetBackup_Enterprise_Server/ But nicely named ones, there is a description URL somewhere.. Here we go, all of the 6.5 manuals: http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/290282.htm Justin. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Device configuration issue
Greetings, We're having some problems with device configuration on our media servers. We normally run "tpautoconf -a -v" with great success, but now it seems to think that another device configuration is already in progress. We get the message "Another device configuration is already in progress.". Additionally, when we try to configure the devices manually using tpconfig, there is no confirmation message indicating the device was successfully added. There is also no error message indicating failure. It just silently ignores it. Has anyone else seen this behavior? We had this problem a couple weeks ago, and restarting NetBackup on the master server cured it, however, I'd like to know more about the problem. 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
[Veritas-bu] Veritas NetBackup 6.0 Media Manager SAs Guide
Listing of Veritas NetBackup (tm) 6.5 Manuals and links to the respective technotes: http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/290282.htm Listing of Veritas NetBackup (tm) 6.0 Manuals and links to the respective technotes: http://seer.entsupport.symantec.com/docs/287039.htm HTH, Andy. +-- |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] Veritas NetBackup 6.0 Media Manager SA's Guide
Anyone have the link for the "Veritas NetBackup 6.0 Media Manager SA's Guide " or one for 6.5 if it is out there? I've been looking on Symantec's site but am having no luck. Thanks in advance... Wayne BeDour Unix System Administrator PH: 313-593-9876 Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** ** LEGAL DISCLAIMER ** ** This E-mail message and any attachments may contain legally privileged, confidential or proprietary information. If you are not the intended recipient(s), or the employee or agent responsible for delivery of this message to the intended recipient(s), you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this E-mail message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please immediately notify the sender and delete this E-mail message from your computer.___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] NetBackup 6.0 to 6.5.1 - PrePrep?
When I upgraded from 5.1 to 6.0 I had to run the nbcc utility and have Symantec take a look at the results and help me stabilize my database prior to the upgrade. Is that necessary/recommended with the 6.0 to 6.5 upgrade? Anyone have any gotcha's I should know about? Anyone already go through this and you're in the Houston area bored silly and feeling charitable? Thanks in advance, Randy ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Windows 2008 Client
You could use the "Internal" Win2k8 backup system, and locate the backup file to disk, and the NetBackup client could then backup to tape! Ok, not the best way, but a supported work around Simon From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ed Wilts Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2008 7:45 PM To: Martin, Jonathan Cc: Randy Samora; veritas-BU Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Windows 2008 Client On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 12:41 PM, Martin, Jonathan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: From what little testing I did here backups work but not restores. That doesn't sound very useful :-) It sounds to me like even if you did testing and it appeared to work, do you really, really want your production servers to have an unsupported backup configuration? It also sounds like if you only want to back on non-OS files, you'll be okay. You just need to have another plan if you wipe out the system disk. .../Ed Ed Wilts, RHCE, BCFP, BCSD, SCSP, SCSE [EMAIL PROTECTED] This email (including any attachments) may contain confidential and/or privileged information or information otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately, do not copy this message or any attachments and do not use it for any purpose or disclose its content to any person, but delete this message and any attachments from your system. Astrium disclaims any and all liability if this email transmission was virus corrupted, altered or falsified. - 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.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup Migration 5.1 -> 6.5
hi John thanks. That is part of the problem, in that the hardware is becoming troublesome. So my plan was to install clean v 5.1 and then upgrade. Then slowly migrate the client systems over to the new server. Eventually the old server will be closed down. Simon From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Howard Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2008 5:23 PM To: WEAVER, Simon (external) Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup Migration 5.1 -> 6.5 I recently pondered the same questions and chose to build a new environment with 6.5 rather than upgrading the existing 5.1 servers. I can't speak for the SAN media servers as we don't have any but if you are upgrading to 6.5 you will need to install 5.1 on the new servers install your license keys and then upgrade to 6.5. Chances are your license keys will not install on a virgin 6.5 server if they are 5.x license keys. As for question 3. I can't imagine how Symantec could ever consider that a violation if you choose to upgrade via a clean install on new hardware. What if your existing server failed, could you be expected to buy new licenses if you had to rebuild on new hardware. As I see it I probably saved Symantec a bunch of support calls by starting clean on a new server. john On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 9:35 AM, WEAVER, Simon (external) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi all, I am weighing up the pros and cons to either do an "in place" upgrade or "migration". I just wanted to know if anyone had any pros or cons to this. The Environment constsits of 10+ SAN SSO Media Servers, 1 Master, 1 Robot. In place should be easy, but Symantec are identifying many, many issues with the current environment, that concerns me that the upgrade will not go clean. Starting afresh for the Master means I will migrate clients and policies over from the old system to the new one. Just a couple of quick questions: 1) My License key is for upgrade. Would it still work if 5.1 was not installed on the "clean" new Server? 2) for the SAN Media Servers, any cons I need to be aware of when upgrading them and pointing them to the new Master Server 3) Does this violate the license agreement by using the new key on new clean hardware? What if I turn off the Master, install 5.1 on the new Server with my current license, and then use the upgrade license key for NBU 6.5 Apprecaite the comments and advice. Thanks Regards Simon This email (including any attachments) may contain confidential and/or privileged information or information otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately, do not copy this message or any attachments and do not use it for any purpose or disclose its content to any person, but delete this message and any attachments from your system. Astrium disclaims any and all liability if this email transmission was virus corrupted, altered or falsified. - 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.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu This email (including any attachments) may contain confidential and/or privileged information or information otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately, do not copy this message or any attachments and do not use it for any purpose or disclose its content to any person, but delete this message and any attachments from your system. Astrium disclaims any and all liability if this email transmission was virus corrupted, altered or falsified. - 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.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Windows 2008 Client
Randy Like me, probably find out that something is implemented, and you need an agent to do an online backup, or discover (like you have) that Win2k8 isnt supported on the current platform! Backups seem to be the last thing people think about when implementing new solutions :( Simon From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Randy Samora Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2008 6:46 PM To: Clausen, Matt R [EQ]; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Windows 2008 Client There's no harm in testing, thanks. I bet the server team will check with me first next time. Yeah, right! From: Clausen, Matt R [EQ] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2008 12:22 PM To: Randy Samora; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: RE: Windows 2008 Client I doubt it. The OS Compatibility Matrix says that for Windows 2008, the minimum client is 6.5.2... Now, you MIGHT be able to use 6.5.1, but I doubt it. I'm pretty sure that there will be code changes introduced with the 6.5.2 client that allows it to work under Windows 2008. If you have a dev-box around somewhere though that's Windows 2008 you can try the 6.5.1 client there to see if it works. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Randy Samora Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2008 12:54 PM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Windows 2008 Client I'm at 6.0 and was really hoping to upgrade to 6.5.1 next week and not very anxious to go to 6.5.2 just yet from what I'm reading. The server team decided to start rolling out 2008 Server servers without checking for compatibility so now I have clients I can't backup. Is there any other way besides upgrading to .2 to resolve this? Thanks, Randy This email (including any attachments) may contain confidential and/or privileged information or information otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately, do not copy this message or any attachments and do not use it for any purpose or disclose its content to any person, but delete this message and any attachments from your system. Astrium disclaims any and all liability if this email transmission was virus corrupted, altered or falsified. - 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.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Windows 2008 Client
Hi randy I think 6.5.2 is the latest to support Win2k8 Simon From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Randy Samora Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2008 5:54 PM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Windows 2008 Client I'm at 6.0 and was really hoping to upgrade to 6.5.1 next week and not very anxious to go to 6.5.2 just yet from what I'm reading. The server team decided to start rolling out 2008 Server servers without checking for compatibility so now I have clients I can't backup. Is there any other way besides upgrading to .2 to resolve this? Thanks, Randy This email (including any attachments) may contain confidential and/or privileged information or information otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately, do not copy this message or any attachments and do not use it for any purpose or disclose its content to any person, but delete this message and any attachments from your system. Astrium disclaims any and all liability if this email transmission was virus corrupted, altered or falsified. - 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.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] MSEO Agent Backup Error
Hi Bill, I've tried reducing the buffer size as what you stated but the problem still persist, do we need to change the NUMBER_DATA_BUFFERS as well? we are setting at 256 at the moment. Regards +-- |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
