Re: [Veritas-bu] Tru64 NetBackup Performance
On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 01:11:49PM -0600, Heathe Yeakley wrote: ... Can anyone think of any stone I've left unturned? Thanks. Check the tape drive definitions in /etc/ddr.dbase and compare the values (esp. block size) between the two different Tru64 systems? ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] AIX 4.3.3 Client
On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 07:27:23AM -0400, scott.geo...@parker.com wrote: I am wondering what creative things people may have done to keep their ancient clients backing up. A common approach is to rsync nightly the unsupported client to local disk on the netbackup server and back it up locally. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] IBM Pseries backups over IVE
On Fri, Aug 01, 2008 at 10:10:58AM -0400, Stafford, Geoff wrote: IANA AIX Expert, nor do I play one on TV but I think there is where the P6 series differs from the P5's. In the P5's you had a Hypervisor backplane that required the multiple interfaces. Now in the P6 series I think, and I could be wrong here, they've made improvements to the IVE and now it's seamless (or at least supposed to be seamless). I haven't played with any p6 gear yet but if that's the case then it opens up interesting possibilites. At worst you should be able to do it the old way. Dale ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] IBM Pseries backups over IVE
On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 05:21:55PM -0400, Stafford, Geoff wrote: Anyone ever configured Pseries backups this way? I have searched far and wide and have not been able to find any BDPs for backing up this hardware. Yes, we've done it this way on p5. You will need to tweak host files on your master server as your internal VLAN is not visible to the master, so the metadata needs to go via the external LAN address. The actually backup data is then constrained to the high speed internal VLAN. Don't forget to change the MTU on the interfaces on the internal VLAN NIC - we use 65394 which dramtically reduces hypervisor overhead due to fragmentation. Note that this won't work if you intend to route your internal VLAN externally. HTH, Dale ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Dynamic tracking and AIX HBAs
On Fri, Jul 07, 2006 at 11:30:57PM +1000, Jim McD wrote: Hi A while back somebody wrote this to the list: don't turn on dynamic tracking on the HBA that serves a robot as it is not compatible and will cause problems. Known problem but not well documented. Yep I can't find much Is the any documentation from Symantec on this in the way of a tech note or the like for AIX and dynamic tracking on HBAs? Hi Jim - this was me. I'll dig up the veritas ref they sent me when I get back to work. Please email me if I forget, or raise a call with them. I can guarantee you it causes problems - not necessarily right away, but later on when san fabric changes/events occur. Regards, Dale ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Error 24 (socket write failed)
On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 02:36:53PM +0200, Marianne van den Berg wrote: Hi all We've been experiencing lots of error 24's on an AIX Master/Media server running NetBackup 5.1 MP4. We don't see this error on any of the media servers - only backups running on the Master server while backing up various clients. Extract from bpbrm: 18:58:15.522 [630882] 2 sighdl: pipe signal 18:58:15.522 [630882] 2 put_string: cannot write data to network: There is no process to read data written to a pipe. (32) 18:58:15.523 [630882] 16 bpbrm tell_mm: could not write STOP BACKUP client1_1145725090 to media manager socket This looks like an internal communication error on the master/media server. We found this TechNote : http://seer.support.veritas.com/docs/271200.htm but cannot find the equivalent for AIX. Any help will be appreciated. Yep - log a call with veritas - we received an engineering binary that goes on top of 5.1MP4 and fixed this exact same problem. Took ages to track it down - it is a race condition in bpbrm that only affects AIX. If you get no luck with them email me off the list and I can provide a veritas reference number. Cya, Dale ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] port tunneling java gui UNIX
On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 03:54:47PM +, Dave Markham wrote: What i have been trying to do is to redirect this all through ssh to i can point my gui to localhost and it forward requests through to the remote java gui on the backup server and all come up with much faster speed. If you normally run an Xclient and ssh -X -C [EMAIL PROTECTED] and run /usr/openv/netbackup/bin/jnbSA then this will be for you as that method is beyond slow in my experience. Rather than run an xclient on your PC I suggest using VNC on the unix server and tunnelling that instead of X. Much faster for me at least and I can keep it running even when my PC isn't. HTH, Dale ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Why use storage unit groups?
Hi All, A collegue and I in different parts of our organisation were discussing the use of storage unit groups. My philosophy is that you should have a single storage unit per media server - robot pair set to use all drives for sanity, with max multiplexing set at the highest you would want to go. This is easy to manage and I think is the most efficient way to use your drives. The other theory put forward is that you have multiple storage unit groups limiting each individual storage unit to one or two drives depending on policy requirements. My collegue says this has been used to resolve problems where multiple policies using different volume pools want to run to the same storage unit thereby causing some sort of exclusive lock. This to me sounds like a bug because we tested it on our AIX 5.1 MP2 server and could not get it to fail (second policy running with a different volume pool would simply cause a new tape mount and jobs would keep running. My collegue says that Veritas recommended storage unit groups to overcome these lock out problems on their Solaris 5.1 media servers. But I can't for the life of me see how it would help. The reasons for using groups that I know of are: - you have multiple robots and prefer one over the other but are happy to use both - you want to load balance the same robot across two or more media servers for a single policy - you have drive contention and want to set some crazy high multiplexing value on your last few drives so that drives don't fail Are there any more? Has anyone been told by Veritas to use groups to overcome storage unit availability problems due to multiple policies/volume pools? Your comments appreciated. Thanks, Dale signature.asc Description: Digital signature
