Re: [Veritas-bu] EMM status: Invalid pool
On Thu, 14 Feb 2008, Justin Piszcz wrote: Quick question, I setup a disk storage unit on one of my media servers, I have it configured exactly as a separate environment I have elsewhere. When I try to backup to it, I get: Error nbjm (pid=) NBU status: 800, EMM status: Invalid pool resource request failed (800) Anyone ever seen this when trying to write to a disk storage unit? Yes, I can write to the disk locally on the media server without any problems. Same configuration on the other server has no issues.. Justin. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu This is with NetBackup 6.0MP4-- any comments? ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] EMM status: Invalid pool
Have you run a catalog backup anytime soon? I've had EMM issues related to the EMM Database growing too large because catalog backups weren't being run, and thus the database logs weren't being pruned. I also see the same error below when the disk the EMM Database is on fills up. -Jonathan -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Justin Piszcz Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 4:02 AM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] EMM status: Invalid pool On Thu, 14 Feb 2008, Justin Piszcz wrote: Quick question, I setup a disk storage unit on one of my media servers, I have it configured exactly as a separate environment I have elsewhere. When I try to backup to it, I get: Error nbjm (pid=) NBU status: 800, EMM status: Invalid pool resource request failed (800) Anyone ever seen this when trying to write to a disk storage unit? Yes, I can write to the disk locally on the media server without any problems. Same configuration on the other server has no issues.. Justin. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu This is with NetBackup 6.0MP4-- any comments? ___ 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] EMM status: Invalid pool
On Fri, 15 Feb 2008, Martin, Jonathan wrote: Have you run a catalog backup anytime soon? I've had EMM issues related to the EMM Database growing too large because catalog backups weren't being run, and thus the database logs weren't being pruned. I also see the same error below when the disk the EMM Database is on fills up. -Jonathan Yes, a catalog backup was run about 5 minutes ago and the disk has 4TiB free. 02/15/2008 01:49:23 - requesting resource ddr-unit 02/15/2008 01:49:23 - requesting resource master-server.NBU_CLIENT.MAXJOBS.meda_server2 02/15/2008 01:49:23 - requesting resource master-server.NBU_POLICY.MAXJOBS.test 02/15/2008 01:49:23 - Error nbjm (pid=1009) NBU status: 800, EMM status: Invalid pool resource request failed (800) The policy is set to use the correct media server with the appropriate disk unit, yet why is it checking to see the max jobs for media_server2? Something very strange going on and I've also tried deleting/re-adding the unit and also cycling services on master,media servers to no avail (yet). Justin. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] EMM status: Invalid pool
On Fri, 15 Feb 2008, Justin Piszcz wrote: On Fri, 15 Feb 2008, Martin, Jonathan wrote: Have you run a catalog backup anytime soon? I've had EMM issues related to the EMM Database growing too large because catalog backups weren't being run, and thus the database logs weren't being pruned. I also see the same error below when the disk the EMM Database is on fills up. -Jonathan Yes, a catalog backup was run about 5 minutes ago and the disk has 4TiB free. 02/15/2008 01:49:23 - requesting resource ddr-unit 02/15/2008 01:49:23 - requesting resource master-server.NBU_CLIENT.MAXJOBS.meda_server2 02/15/2008 01:49:23 - requesting resource master-server.NBU_POLICY.MAXJOBS.test 02/15/2008 01:49:23 - Error nbjm (pid=1009) NBU status: 800, EMM status: Invalid pool resource request failed (800) The policy is set to use the correct media server with the appropriate disk unit, yet why is it checking to see the max jobs for media_server2? Something very strange going on and I've also tried deleting/re-adding the unit and also cycling services on master,media servers to no avail (yet). Justin. Nevermind about the server2, that is the one I am backing up... Will try to create another disk unit on another media server host and see if it works. Justin. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] EMM status: Invalid pool
On Fri, 15 Feb 2008, Justin Piszcz wrote: On Fri, 15 Feb 2008, Justin Piszcz wrote: On Fri, 15 Feb 2008, Martin, Jonathan wrote: Have you run a catalog backup anytime soon? I've had EMM issues related to the EMM Database growing too large because catalog backups weren't being run, and thus the database logs weren't being pruned. I also see the same error below when the disk the EMM Database is on fills up. -Jonathan Yes, a catalog backup was run about 5 minutes ago and the disk has 4TiB free. 02/15/2008 01:49:23 - requesting resource ddr-unit 02/15/2008 01:49:23 - requesting resource master-server.NBU_CLIENT.MAXJOBS.meda_server2 02/15/2008 01:49:23 - requesting resource master-server.NBU_POLICY.MAXJOBS.test 02/15/2008 01:49:23 - Error nbjm (pid=1009) NBU status: 800, EMM status: Invalid pool resource request failed (800) The policy is set to use the correct media server with the appropriate disk unit, yet why is it checking to see the max jobs for media_server2? Something very strange going on and I've also tried deleting/re-adding the unit and also cycling services on master,media servers to no avail (yet). Justin. Nevermind about the server2, that is the one I am backing up... Will try to create another disk unit on another media server host and see if it works. Same deal, even on the master server, created a little dsu, same error, looking into it. Justin. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Speaking of NTFS:
My backup systems are Solaris, I have the luxury of vxfs filesystems for my staging database areas. I do however back up Windows file servers, Are there any guidelines to NTFS volumes that people would recommend ? I thinking along the lines: Defragmenting, Number of streams, LUN Virtulization tech, Volume Sizes, Maintaining free space, Snapshot methods, impact of ohh sooo many small files Performance improvements with Advanced client / Flashbackup, SAN Media server, (For the adventurous) SAN client ? For example, i currently have pain with about a dozen windows clients, from what i can tell we do not do defragmentaion their LUNS live on HP EVA's sharing spindles with hosts Free Space is minimum (~7%) Volumes are only ~500GB We backup with Multiple streams (Exceeds weekend (and daily) backup window if we don't (Windows are large) Currently backing up the windows dataservers is a pain point for me, I am interested in hearing peoples learnings / Golden rules when it comes to backing up large (over 500GB) NTFS Volumes. Adam Mellor Senior Unix Support Analyst CF IT TECHNOLOGY SERVICES Woodside Energy Ltd. From: Ed Wilts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 14 February 2008 1:17 PM To: Mellor, Adam A. Cc: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Defrag DSU? On Feb 13, 2008 6:22 PM, Mellor, Adam A. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Although I am not currently defragmenting my current DSU volumes, I previously had ~4TB in a single DSU under NBU 5.1 . This volume was running vxfs vxfs says it all, you lucky guy. NTFS just sucks... try a 4TB DSSU on Windows and see how much fun you have. I do like your idea of dropping the threshold to a low value to empty it out more frequently though. .../Ed -- Ed Wilts, Mounds View, MN, USA mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] NOTICE: This email and any attachments are confidential. They may contain legally privileged information or copyright material. You must not read, copy, use or disclose them without authorisation. If you are not an intended recipient, please contact us at once by return email and then delete both messages and all attachments. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] EMM status: Invalid pool
Justin do you have any override storage unit or override media pool marked in the schedules for your policy you are trying to back up? I had that issue when I created a DSU for testing. Doug Preston Systems Engineer Land America Tax and Flood Services Phone 626-339-5221 Ext 1104 Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] NOTICE: This electronic mail transmission may constitute a communication that is legally privileged. It is not intended for transmission to, or receipt by, any unauthorized persons. If you have received this electronic mail transmission in error, please delete it from your system without copying it, and notify the sender by reply e-mail, so that our address record can be corrected. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Justin Piszcz Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 2:32 AM To: Martin, Jonathan Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] EMM status: Invalid pool On Fri, 15 Feb 2008, Justin Piszcz wrote: On Fri, 15 Feb 2008, Justin Piszcz wrote: On Fri, 15 Feb 2008, Martin, Jonathan wrote: Have you run a catalog backup anytime soon? I've had EMM issues related to the EMM Database growing too large because catalog backups weren't being run, and thus the database logs weren't being pruned. I also see the same error below when the disk the EMM Database is on fills up. -Jonathan Yes, a catalog backup was run about 5 minutes ago and the disk has 4TiB free. 02/15/2008 01:49:23 - requesting resource ddr-unit 02/15/2008 01:49:23 - requesting resource master-server.NBU_CLIENT.MAXJOBS.meda_server2 02/15/2008 01:49:23 - requesting resource master-server.NBU_POLICY.MAXJOBS.test 02/15/2008 01:49:23 - Error nbjm (pid=1009) NBU status: 800, EMM status: Invalid pool resource request failed (800) The policy is set to use the correct media server with the appropriate disk unit, yet why is it checking to see the max jobs for media_server2? Something very strange going on and I've also tried deleting/re-adding the unit and also cycling services on master,media servers to no avail (yet). Justin. Nevermind about the server2, that is the one I am backing up... Will try to create another disk unit on another media server host and see if it works. Same deal, even on the master server, created a little dsu, same error, looking into it. Justin. ___ 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] EMM status: Invalid pool
On Fri, 15 Feb 2008, Preston, Douglas L wrote: Justin do you have any override storage unit or override media pool marked in the schedules for your policy you are trying to back up? I had that issue when I created a DSU for testing. Doug Preston Systems Engineer Land America Tax and Flood Services Phone 626-339-5221 Ext 1104 Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hey Doug, no I do not, and that's what makes it so perpelxing, in addition I also used an override just 'for fun' for the DDR only and the problem persists.. Justin. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] SUMMARY: request for comments
The majority of people were not against the occassional job posting for netbackup hiring people, since it's highly topical to the people on this list. A few were very much for it, a few were against it. There were a couple of excellent suggestions that this could be handled at BackupCentral.com, which I think is a great idea and I'm approaching Curtis about it. In the mean time, it's unlikely that things will devolve into a job market free for all short term, so we'll allow posting on these conditions: * 1 posting *total* per job * must be for Netbackup related job (no TSM, legato, etc) * strongly prefer it would be list members doing the posting in their capacity as a hiring manager or at a company looking for such position, *not* recruiters (as there would be no way to guarantee non-deduplication in the case of multiple recruiters). If there is a single recruiter for a particular job (sole-contract) and that recruiter doesn't make a nuisance of himself/herself by posting dozens of jobs, that's an acceptable exception. * must include off-list contact information for responses * subject of message should include keyword JOB so that people can filter. If things devolve, we can revisit. I expect there will be at most 1 per week and lost in the noise. I won't be monitoring this closely, so I rely on you, the members, to be eyes on policy violations.. (I have little doubt. ;) Thanks for all of your thoughtful responses. Doug ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State
Yes, NBU will override the selection. We discovered that recently when we realized we had a bunch of Win2k servers mistakenly configured as Win2k3; System_State was still being backed up as opposed to Shadow Copy Components. Ken Zufall Technical Analyst D660C The Goodyear Tire Rubber Company GTN 446.0592 or 330.796.0592 Randy Samora [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 02/15/2008 09:10 AM To Rosenkoetter, Gabriel [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject Re: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State I?ve always wondered about that. In the client list of the policy, if I say the client is a 2000 Server and it is actually a 2003 Server. Does NBU override my 2000 Server selection? From: Rosenkoetter, Gabriel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 8:01 AM To: Randy Samora Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State No, ALL_LOCAL_DRIVES includes the appropriate one of System_State:\ or Shadow Copy Components:\ based on how you've listed the client (Windows2000 v. WindowsNET, for example). Or, I think it's based on that. It might be based on what the client's bpcd says when the media server connects to it. (The docs are hazy. Ahem, Veri... er, Symantec readers.) -- gabriel rosenkoetter Radian Group Inc, Unix/Linux/VMware Sysadmin / Backup Recovery [EMAIL PROTECTED], 215 231 1556 From: Randy Samora [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 4:22 PM To: WEAVER, Simon (external) Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State I?m using the All Local Drives directive. Does it make a difference to list Shadow Copy Components separately? From: WEAVER, Simon (external) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 12:56 AM To: Randy Samora; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State Randy In the backup policy where this client belongs, are you selecting the Shadow Copy Components directive? S. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Randy Samora Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 11:21 PM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State Part of my requirements are test restores of critical boxes in a lab environment. The lab is isolated and when I restore a client, there?s not really much we can test because the client looks for the production network. Today I had to restore a Windows 2003 Server in the production environment and most of the registry wasn?t restored; services and other objects were missing. With the test restores, I always had the option of doing an ntbackup of the System State and then I would run a full backup of the client. I?d take my tape to the lab, run a full restore, but before I rebooted the restored client, I restored the ntbackup of the System State (Shadow Copy Component.) That seemed to work just fine. But today when the server blew up, there was no opportunity to do an ntbackup of the SS first. I asked Symantec last year if the ntbackup was still needed and they said no, a full backup and restore should recover the client. I just never had the chance to test that theory. Am I missing a step? I installed the OS from a basic CD install, loaded the NBU client, and then did a full restore. But it?s as if the system state was never restored so I?m wondering if I?m even backing it up. How can I tell? Do I need VSS or VSP activated in order to get a good copy of the system state? We turned VSP off over a year ago because we were having problems with the orphaned cache files. I?ve never gone back and changed the setting on most of the clients and my plans were to start using VSS but haven?t gotten to that task either. Is there a trick or an added step to getting a good backup of the system state on a Windows 2003 Server server or is there a trick to restoring it? 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
Re: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State
I wish I had the option of doing Windows infrequently. 800 clients, all Windows here. I'm getting ready to jump out of one if this keeps up. From: Rosenkoetter, Gabriel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 8:36 AM To: Randy Samora Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State Though the client will show up under host properties with its real OS type (probed from the master), it's my understanding that it'd be Best Practice to change its OS type in the policy definition (ie, remove it and readd it with the same name). I also don't know what effect that does or doesn't have. (I do Windows as infrequently and rapidly as I possibly can.) -- gabriel rosenkoetter Radian Group Inc, Unix/Linux/VMware Sysadmin / Backup Recovery [EMAIL PROTECTED], 215 231 1556 From: Randy Samora [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 9:11 AM To: Rosenkoetter, Gabriel Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State I've always wondered about that. In the client list of the policy, if I say the client is a 2000 Server and it is actually a 2003 Server. Does NBU override my 2000 Server selection? From: Rosenkoetter, Gabriel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 8:01 AM To: Randy Samora Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State No, ALL_LOCAL_DRIVES includes the appropriate one of System_State:\ or Shadow Copy Components:\ based on how you've listed the client (Windows2000 v. WindowsNET, for example). Or, I think it's based on that. It might be based on what the client's bpcd says when the media server connects to it. (The docs are hazy. Ahem, Veri... er, Symantec readers.) -- gabriel rosenkoetter Radian Group Inc, Unix/Linux/VMware Sysadmin / Backup Recovery [EMAIL PROTECTED], 215 231 1556 From: Randy Samora [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 4:22 PM To: WEAVER, Simon (external) Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State I'm using the All Local Drives directive. Does it make a difference to list Shadow Copy Components separately? From: WEAVER, Simon (external) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 12:56 AM To: Randy Samora; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State Randy In the backup policy where this client belongs, are you selecting the Shadow Copy Components directive? S. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Randy Samora Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 11:21 PM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State Part of my requirements are test restores of critical boxes in a lab environment. The lab is isolated and when I restore a client, there's not really much we can test because the client looks for the production network. Today I had to restore a Windows 2003 Server in the production environment and most of the registry wasn't restored; services and other objects were missing. With the test restores, I always had the option of doing an ntbackup of the System State and then I would run a full backup of the client. I'd take my tape to the lab, run a full restore, but before I rebooted the restored client, I restored the ntbackup of the System State (Shadow Copy Component.) That seemed to work just fine. But today when the server blew up, there was no opportunity to do an ntbackup of the SS first. I asked Symantec last year if the ntbackup was still needed and they said no, a full backup and restore should recover the client. I just never had the chance to test that theory. Am I missing a step? I installed the OS from a basic CD install, loaded the NBU client, and then did a full restore. But it's as if the system state was never restored so I'm wondering if I'm even backing it up. How can I tell? Do I need VSS or VSP activated in order to get a good copy of the system state? We turned VSP off over a year ago because we were having problems with the orphaned cache files. I've never gone back and changed the setting on most of the clients and my plans were to start using VSS but haven't gotten to that task either. Is there a trick or an added step to getting a good backup of the system state on a Windows 2003 Server server or is there a trick to restoring it? 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
Re: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State
Though the client will show up under host properties with its real OS type (probed from the master), it's my understanding that it'd be Best Practice to change its OS type in the policy definition (ie, remove it and readd it with the same name). I also don't know what effect that does or doesn't have. (I do Windows as infrequently and rapidly as I possibly can.) -- gabriel rosenkoetter Radian Group Inc, Unix/Linux/VMware Sysadmin / Backup Recovery [EMAIL PROTECTED], 215 231 1556 _ From: Randy Samora [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 9:11 AM To: Rosenkoetter, Gabriel Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State I've always wondered about that. In the client list of the policy, if I say the client is a 2000 Server and it is actually a 2003 Server. Does NBU override my 2000 Server selection? From: Rosenkoetter, Gabriel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 8:01 AM To: Randy Samora Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State No, ALL_LOCAL_DRIVES includes the appropriate one of System_State:\ or Shadow Copy Components:\ based on how you've listed the client (Windows2000 v. WindowsNET, for example). Or, I think it's based on that. It might be based on what the client's bpcd says when the media server connects to it. (The docs are hazy. Ahem, Veri... er, Symantec readers.) -- gabriel rosenkoetter Radian Group Inc, Unix/Linux/VMware Sysadmin / Backup Recovery [EMAIL PROTECTED], 215 231 1556 _ From: Randy Samora [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 4:22 PM To: WEAVER, Simon (external) Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State I'm using the All Local Drives directive. Does it make a difference to list Shadow Copy Components separately? From: WEAVER, Simon (external) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 12:56 AM To: Randy Samora; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State Randy In the backup policy where this client belongs, are you selecting the Shadow Copy Components directive? S. _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Randy Samora Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 11:21 PM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State Part of my requirements are test restores of critical boxes in a lab environment. The lab is isolated and when I restore a client, there's not really much we can test because the client looks for the production network. Today I had to restore a Windows 2003 Server in the production environment and most of the registry wasn't restored; services and other objects were missing. With the test restores, I always had the option of doing an ntbackup of the System State and then I would run a full backup of the client. I'd take my tape to the lab, run a full restore, but before I rebooted the restored client, I restored the ntbackup of the System State (Shadow Copy Component.) That seemed to work just fine. But today when the server blew up, there was no opportunity to do an ntbackup of the SS first. I asked Symantec last year if the ntbackup was still needed and they said no, a full backup and restore should recover the client. I just never had the chance to test that theory. Am I missing a step? I installed the OS from a basic CD install, loaded the NBU client, and then did a full restore. But it's as if the system state was never restored so I'm wondering if I'm even backing it up. How can I tell? Do I need VSS or VSP activated in order to get a good copy of the system state? We turned VSP off over a year ago because we were having problems with the orphaned cache files. I've never gone back and changed the setting on most of the clients and my plans were to start using VSS but haven't gotten to that task either. Is there a trick or an added step to getting a good backup of the system state on a Windows 2003 Server server or is there a trick to restoring it? 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
Re: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State
I've always wondered about that. In the client list of the policy, if I say the client is a 2000 Server and it is actually a 2003 Server. Does NBU override my 2000 Server selection? From: Rosenkoetter, Gabriel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 8:01 AM To: Randy Samora Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State No, ALL_LOCAL_DRIVES includes the appropriate one of System_State:\ or Shadow Copy Components:\ based on how you've listed the client (Windows2000 v. WindowsNET, for example). Or, I think it's based on that. It might be based on what the client's bpcd says when the media server connects to it. (The docs are hazy. Ahem, Veri... er, Symantec readers.) -- gabriel rosenkoetter Radian Group Inc, Unix/Linux/VMware Sysadmin / Backup Recovery [EMAIL PROTECTED], 215 231 1556 From: Randy Samora [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 4:22 PM To: WEAVER, Simon (external) Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State I'm using the All Local Drives directive. Does it make a difference to list Shadow Copy Components separately? From: WEAVER, Simon (external) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 12:56 AM To: Randy Samora; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State Randy In the backup policy where this client belongs, are you selecting the Shadow Copy Components directive? S. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Randy Samora Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 11:21 PM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State Part of my requirements are test restores of critical boxes in a lab environment. The lab is isolated and when I restore a client, there's not really much we can test because the client looks for the production network. Today I had to restore a Windows 2003 Server in the production environment and most of the registry wasn't restored; services and other objects were missing. With the test restores, I always had the option of doing an ntbackup of the System State and then I would run a full backup of the client. I'd take my tape to the lab, run a full restore, but before I rebooted the restored client, I restored the ntbackup of the System State (Shadow Copy Component.) That seemed to work just fine. But today when the server blew up, there was no opportunity to do an ntbackup of the SS first. I asked Symantec last year if the ntbackup was still needed and they said no, a full backup and restore should recover the client. I just never had the chance to test that theory. Am I missing a step? I installed the OS from a basic CD install, loaded the NBU client, and then did a full restore. But it's as if the system state was never restored so I'm wondering if I'm even backing it up. How can I tell? Do I need VSS or VSP activated in order to get a good copy of the system state? We turned VSP off over a year ago because we were having problems with the orphaned cache files. I've never gone back and changed the setting on most of the clients and my plans were to start using VSS but haven't gotten to that task either. Is there a trick or an added step to getting a good backup of the system state on a Windows 2003 Server server or is there a trick to restoring it? 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] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State
No, ALL_LOCAL_DRIVES includes the appropriate one of System_State:\ or Shadow Copy Components:\ based on how you've listed the client (Windows2000 v. WindowsNET, for example). Or, I think it's based on that. It might be based on what the client's bpcd says when the media server connects to it. (The docs are hazy. Ahem, Veri... er, Symantec readers.) -- gabriel rosenkoetter Radian Group Inc, Unix/Linux/VMware Sysadmin / Backup Recovery [EMAIL PROTECTED], 215 231 1556 _ From: Randy Samora [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 4:22 PM To: WEAVER, Simon (external) Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State I'm using the All Local Drives directive. Does it make a difference to list Shadow Copy Components separately? From: WEAVER, Simon (external) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 12:56 AM To: Randy Samora; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State Randy In the backup policy where this client belongs, are you selecting the Shadow Copy Components directive? S. _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Randy Samora Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 11:21 PM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State Part of my requirements are test restores of critical boxes in a lab environment. The lab is isolated and when I restore a client, there's not really much we can test because the client looks for the production network. Today I had to restore a Windows 2003 Server in the production environment and most of the registry wasn't restored; services and other objects were missing. With the test restores, I always had the option of doing an ntbackup of the System State and then I would run a full backup of the client. I'd take my tape to the lab, run a full restore, but before I rebooted the restored client, I restored the ntbackup of the System State (Shadow Copy Component.) That seemed to work just fine. But today when the server blew up, there was no opportunity to do an ntbackup of the SS first. I asked Symantec last year if the ntbackup was still needed and they said no, a full backup and restore should recover the client. I just never had the chance to test that theory. Am I missing a step? I installed the OS from a basic CD install, loaded the NBU client, and then did a full restore. But it's as if the system state was never restored so I'm wondering if I'm even backing it up. How can I tell? Do I need VSS or VSP activated in order to get a good copy of the system state? We turned VSP off over a year ago because we were having problems with the orphaned cache files. I've never gone back and changed the setting on most of the clients and my plans were to start using VSS but haven't gotten to that task either. Is there a trick or an added step to getting a good backup of the system state on a Windows 2003 Server server or is there a trick to restoring it? 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] Speaking of NTFS:
On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 7:35 AM, Mellor, Adam A. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I do however back up Windows file servers, Are there any guidelines to NTFS volumes that people would recommend ? I thinking along the lines: Defragmenting, Number of streams, LUN Virtulization tech, Volume Sizes, Maintaining free space, Snapshot methods, impact of ohh sooo many small files Performance improvements with Advanced client / Flashbackup, SAN Media server, (For the adventurous) SAN client ? For example, i currently have pain with about a dozen windows clients, from what i can tell we do not do defragmentaion That's not a backup issue - the Windows admins should be doing that on a regular basis anyway. You can't worry about it. The worse the fragmentation, the worse the load on the client. their LUNS live on HP EVA's sharing spindles with hosts Same here. Not an issue for us. In fact, some of our DSSUs were on the same EVA as the hosts they're backing up. We've since moved most of our DSSUs off to a SATABeast. Free Space is minimum (~7%) Not an issue for backups unless you're using FlashBackups - there is a space requirement for the snapshots. Volumes are only ~500GB That's that not that bad unless you have lots of little files. We backup with Multiple streams (Exceeds weekend (and daily) backup window if we don't (Windows are large) So do we with a few exceptions - large FlashBackups on 32-bit Windows systems has a tendency to tip the box over so those single-stream. Because they're clusters and using virtual servers, NetBackup gives us no good way of single-streaming them so we use a dedicated DSSU with a concurrent job limit of 1 to act as the throttle point. Currently backing up the windows dataservers is a pain point for me, I am interested in hearing peoples learnings / Golden rules when it comes to backing up large (over 500GB) NTFS Volumes. If you have a large number of files, use FlashBackup. For us, it cuts the time in half. 64-bit Windows is also appears much faster at feeding the backup stream than 32-bit Windows. TOE cards seem to help but only on file servers - on SQL servers, there are rumored bugs in the driver that cause all sorts of grief (lots and lots of little transactions which is not typical for file/backup servers). Here's an example of a recent largeish Windows backup picked at random: 525GB backed up (as reported by NetBackup), 21M files, using FlashBackup on a 64-bit Windows box. Elapsed time 5 hours and 17 minutes with a reported speed of about 29MB/sec. That was writing to DSSU on a Solaris media server (different EVA than the source volume). We don't present any Windows volumes (other than DSSUs) greater than 1TB for two reasons: 1) the backup time gets too long, and 2) if you get into a chkdsk situation (don't forget, NTFS is non-journaling), you may need to take the volume offline for a long time... We don't use SAN Media Servers but hope to test the SAN Client sometime...it's on the TODO list. .../Ed -- Ed Wilts, Mounds View, MN, USA mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State
If the one you try to jump out of is designed by the same folks that brought the others ones you'll probably bounce off the blue screen in front of it... From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Randy Samora Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 9:40 AM To: Rosenkoetter, Gabriel Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State I wish I had the option of doing Windows infrequently. 800 clients, all Windows here. I'm getting ready to jump out of one if this keeps up. From: Rosenkoetter, Gabriel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 8:36 AM To: Randy Samora Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State Though the client will show up under host properties with its real OS type (probed from the master), it's my understanding that it'd be Best Practice to change its OS type in the policy definition (ie, remove it and readd it with the same name). I also don't know what effect that does or doesn't have. (I do Windows as infrequently and rapidly as I possibly can.) -- gabriel rosenkoetter Radian Group Inc, Unix/Linux/VMware Sysadmin / Backup Recovery [EMAIL PROTECTED], 215 231 1556 From: Randy Samora [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 9:11 AM To: Rosenkoetter, Gabriel Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State I've always wondered about that. In the client list of the policy, if I say the client is a 2000 Server and it is actually a 2003 Server. Does NBU override my 2000 Server selection? From: Rosenkoetter, Gabriel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 8:01 AM To: Randy Samora Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State No, ALL_LOCAL_DRIVES includes the appropriate one of System_State:\ or Shadow Copy Components:\ based on how you've listed the client (Windows2000 v. WindowsNET, for example). Or, I think it's based on that. It might be based on what the client's bpcd says when the media server connects to it. (The docs are hazy. Ahem, Veri... er, Symantec readers.) -- gabriel rosenkoetter Radian Group Inc, Unix/Linux/VMware Sysadmin / Backup Recovery [EMAIL PROTECTED], 215 231 1556 From: Randy Samora [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 4:22 PM To: WEAVER, Simon (external) Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State I'm using the All Local Drives directive. Does it make a difference to list Shadow Copy Components separately? From: WEAVER, Simon (external) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 12:56 AM To: Randy Samora; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State Randy In the backup policy where this client belongs, are you selecting the Shadow Copy Components directive? S. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Randy Samora Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 11:21 PM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State Part of my requirements are test restores of critical boxes in a lab environment. The lab is isolated and when I restore a client, there's not really much we can test because the client looks for the production network. Today I had to restore a Windows 2003 Server in the production environment and most of the registry wasn't restored; services and other objects were missing. With the test restores, I always had the option of doing an ntbackup of the System State and then I would run a full backup of the client. I'd take my tape to the lab, run a full restore, but before I rebooted the restored client, I restored the ntbackup of the System State (Shadow Copy Component.) That seemed to work just fine. But today when the server blew up, there was no opportunity to do an ntbackup of the SS first. I asked Symantec last year if the ntbackup was still needed and they said no, a full backup and restore should recover the client. I just never had the chance to test that theory. Am I missing a step? I installed the OS from a basic CD install, loaded the NBU client, and then did a full restore. But it's as if the system state was never restored so I'm wondering if I'm even backing it up. How can I tell? Do I need VSS or VSP activated in order to get a good copy of the system state? We turned VSP off over a year ago because we were having problems with the orphaned cache files. I've never gone back and changed the setting on most of the clients and my plans were to start using VSS but haven't gotten to that task
Re: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State
I don't think adding a new client is an issue. If I remember correctly, the default selection is for NetBackup to ask the client what OS is loaded. So if the lines of communication are open (and they should be) the OS should self-populate. But you're right, most of my discrepancies are from years of upgrades and no one tells the tape dude. From: Ed Wilts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 9:02 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Randy Samora; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 8:25 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, NBU will override the selection. We discovered that recently when we realized we had a bunch of Win2k servers mistakenly configured as Win2k3; System_State was still being backed up as opposed to Shadow Copy Components. I think you may have that backwards but that's besides the point. I actually have a formal change request into Symantec on this one - the backup admin should not be telling NetBackup what the OS type is when there's a NetBackup client sitting out there that knows exactly what it is. This gets even uglier when you have the client in multiple policies (common for clusters) and you have to keep them all updated on a regular basis. And I'm just willing to bet at least a cup of coffee that the vast majority of backup admins aren't told when an OS is upgraded. .../Ed -- Ed Wilts, Mounds View, MN, USA mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State
On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 8:25 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, NBU will override the selection. We discovered that recently when we realized we had a bunch of Win2k servers mistakenly configured as Win2k3; System_State was still being backed up as opposed to Shadow Copy Components. I think you may have that backwards but that's besides the point. I actually have a formal change request into Symantec on this one - the backup admin should not be telling NetBackup what the OS type is when there's a NetBackup client sitting out there that knows exactly what it is. This gets even uglier when you have the client in multiple policies (common for clusters) and you have to keep them all updated on a regular basis. And I'm just willing to bet at least a cup of coffee that the vast majority of backup admins aren't told when an OS is upgraded. .../Ed -- Ed Wilts, Mounds View, MN, USA mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Netbackup changes
Hello, I am interested to know if anyone has or knows of any software which can easily track the changes made in netbackup. We have a fairly large install and would like to be able to track who makes changes to what and when for obvious reasons. I have had a look at the documentation but its not clear if its possible in the standard product. Does anyone have any advice that they can provide me? Regards, Jimmy ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup changes
You can turn auditing on in the JAVA GUI, if you use that. However, the tracking will be on the system that anyone logged in on. You can tie that down to one system and that would allow you to control it a little better. I know that Aptare also does track some changes from within the GUI...but I am not positive what level it comes down to. Since any product is going to be somewhat dependant on what resources Symantec has natively (if the changes aren't tracked within the product at all, it's hard for a third party software to track them), it might be hard to find a product that doe what you are looking for. Depending on the level of auditing you want. I do know that NBU 7.0 is going to be a security focused release with much more emphasis on auditing and tracking information. Reneé Carlisle ServerWare Corporation -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jimmy Stewpot Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 10:37 AM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup changes Hello, I am interested to know if anyone has or knows of any software which can easily track the changes made in netbackup. We have a fairly large install and would like to be able to track who makes changes to what and when for obvious reasons. I have had a look at the documentation but its not clear if its possible in the standard product. Does anyone have any advice that they can provide me? Regards, Jimmy ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu This Email has been scanned for all viruses by PAETEC Email Scanning Services, utilizing MessageLabs proprietary SkyScan infrastructure. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.paetec.com. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Calculating amount of tapes I have written to with a certain retention level.
:\ or Shadow Copy Components:\ based on how you've listed the client (Windows2000 v. WindowsNET, for example). Or, I think it's based on that. It might be based on what the client's bpcd says when the media server connects to it. (The docs are hazy. Ahem, Veri... er, Symantec readers.) -- gabriel rosenkoetter Radian Group Inc, Unix/Linux/VMware Sysadmin / Backup Recovery [EMAIL PROTECTED], 215 231 1556 _ From: Randy Samora [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 4:22 PM To: WEAVER, Simon (external) Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State I'm using the All Local Drives directive. Does it make a difference to list Shadow Copy Components separately? From: WEAVER, Simon (external) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 12:56 AM To: Randy Samora; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State Randy In the backup policy where this client belongs, are you selecting the Shadow Copy Components directive? S. _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Randy Samora Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 11:21 PM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State Part of my requirements are test restores of critical boxes in a lab environment. The lab is isolated and when I restore a client, there's not really much we can test because the client looks for the production network. Today I had to restore a Windows 2003 Server in the production environment and most of the registry wasn't restored; services and other objects were missing. With the test restores, I always had the option of doing an ntbackup of the System State and then I would run a full backup of the client. I'd take my tape to the lab, run a full restore, but before I rebooted the restored client, I restored the ntbackup of the System State (Shadow Copy Component.) That seemed to work just fine. But today when the server blew up, there was no opportunity to do an ntbackup of the SS first. I asked Symantec last year if the ntbackup was still needed and they said no, a full backup and restore should recover the client. I just never had the chance to test that theory. Am I missing a step? I installed the OS from a basic CD install, loaded the NBU client, and then did a full restore. But it's as if the system state was never restored so I'm wondering if I'm even backing it up. How can I tell? Do I need VSS or VSP activated in order to get a good copy of the system state? We turned VSP off over a year ago because we were having problems with the orphaned cache files. I've never gone back and changed the setting on most of the clients and my plans were to start using VSS but haven't gotten to that task either. Is there a trick or an added step to getting a good backup of the system state on a Windows 2003 Server server or is there a trick to restoring it? 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 -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/pipermail/veritas-bu/attachments/20080215/ e9edc0b8/attachment-0001.htm -- Message: 3 Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 09:05:43 -0500 (EST) From: Justin Piszcz [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] EMM status: Invalid pool To: Preston, Douglas L [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Martin, Jonathan [EMAIL PROTECTED], veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed On Fri, 15 Feb 2008, Preston, Douglas L wrote: Justin do you have any override storage unit or override media pool marked in the schedules for your policy you are trying to back up? I had that issue when I created a DSU for testing. Doug Preston Systems Engineer Land America Tax and Flood Services Phone 626-339-5221 Ext 1104 Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hey Doug, no I do not, and that's what makes it so perpelxing, in addition I also used an override just 'for fun' for the DDR only and the problem persists.. Justin. -- Message: 4 Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 08:10:57 -0600 From: Randy
Re: [Veritas-bu] Calculating amount of tapes I have written to with acertain retention level.
-bu -- Message: 2 Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 09:01:03 -0500 From: Rosenkoetter, Gabriel [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State To: Randy Samora [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] roupinc.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii No, ALL_LOCAL_DRIVES includes the appropriate one of System_State:\ or Shadow Copy Components:\ based on how you've listed the client (Windows2000 v. WindowsNET, for example). Or, I think it's based on that. It might be based on what the client's bpcd says when the media server connects to it. (The docs are hazy. Ahem, Veri... er, Symantec readers.) -- gabriel rosenkoetter Radian Group Inc, Unix/Linux/VMware Sysadmin / Backup Recovery [EMAIL PROTECTED], 215 231 1556 _ From: Randy Samora [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 4:22 PM To: WEAVER, Simon (external) Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State I'm using the All Local Drives directive. Does it make a difference to list Shadow Copy Components separately? From: WEAVER, Simon (external) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 12:56 AM To: Randy Samora; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State Randy In the backup policy where this client belongs, are you selecting the Shadow Copy Components directive? S. _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Randy Samora Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 11:21 PM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State Part of my requirements are test restores of critical boxes in a lab environment. The lab is isolated and when I restore a client, there's not really much we can test because the client looks for the production network. Today I had to restore a Windows 2003 Server in the production environment and most of the registry wasn't restored; services and other objects were missing. With the test restores, I always had the option of doing an ntbackup of the System State and then I would run a full backup of the client. I'd take my tape to the lab, run a full restore, but before I rebooted the restored client, I restored the ntbackup of the System State (Shadow Copy Component.) That seemed to work just fine. But today when the server blew up, there was no opportunity to do an ntbackup of the SS first. I asked Symantec last year if the ntbackup was still needed and they said no, a full backup and restore should recover the client. I just never had the chance to test that theory. Am I missing a step? I installed the OS from a basic CD install, loaded the NBU client, and then did a full restore. But it's as if the system state was never restored so I'm wondering if I'm even backing it up. How can I tell? Do I need VSS or VSP activated in order to get a good copy of the system state? We turned VSP off over a year ago because we were having problems with the orphaned cache files. I've never gone back and changed the setting on most of the clients and my plans were to start using VSS but haven't gotten to that task either. Is there a trick or an added step to getting a good backup of the system state on a Windows 2003 Server server or is there a trick to restoring it? 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 -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/pipermail/veritas-bu/attachments/20080215/ e9edc0b8/attachment-0001.htm -- Message: 3 Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 09:05:43 -0500 (EST) From: Justin Piszcz [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] EMM status: Invalid pool To: Preston, Douglas L [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Martin, Jonathan [EMAIL PROTECTED], veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed On Fri, 15 Feb 2008, Preston, Douglas L wrote: Justin do you have any override storage unit or override media pool marked in the schedules for your policy you are trying
Re: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup changes
Hi Thanks for your response, is we run the GUI from a windows system remotely can we enable logging on the server and the logs are stored there? It maybe a stupid question but i cannot find it in the administration guides. Regards, Jimmy rcarlisle wrote: You can turn auditing on in the JAVA GUI, if you use that. However, the tracking will be on the system that anyone logged in on. You can tie that down to one system and that would allow you to control it a little better. I know that Aptare also does track some changes from within the GUI...but I am not positive what level it comes down to. Since any product is going to be somewhat dependant on what resources Symantec has natively (if the changes aren't tracked within the product at all, it's hard for a third party software to track them), it might be hard to find a product that doe what you are looking for. Depending on the level of auditing you want. I do know that NBU 7.0 is going to be a security focused release with much more emphasis on auditing and tracking information. Reneé Carlisle ServerWare Corporation -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jimmy Stewpot Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 10:37 AM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup changes Hello, I am interested to know if anyone has or knows of any software which can easily track the changes made in netbackup. We have a fairly large install and would like to be able to track who makes changes to what and when for obvious reasons. I have had a look at the documentation but its not clear if its possible in the standard product. Does anyone have any advice that they can provide me? Regards, Jimmy ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu This Email has been scanned for all viruses by PAETEC Email Scanning Services, utilizing MessageLabs proprietary SkyScan infrastructure. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.paetec.com. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Speaking of NTFS:
Adam, This is a good thread and I am going to add my comments, but am interested to hear what others have to say. First, we have the same issue with large, slow, Windows clients. Typically we employ the break it up into separate datastreams/policies approach for these. This works, but is a real headache to get the right configuration to fit into the window. I've also tried flashbackup, which works better if you have the bandwidth, but ended up taking about the same amount of time as several Windows policies. The problem in this situation was the large amount of free space that gets backed up. I opted to go back to the several policies approach, for now. I am very interested in checking out the SAN client, but it currently has limitations of disk only targets and certain HBAs. The situation I am in does not really allow us to turn the clients into SAN Media Servers, but I have done this in the past and I did not like it. As you probably know, drive issues or NBU maintenance may require rebooting your Media Server, which is a bad thing when it's a production application server. So you then get into the no backups or take a downtime lose-lose choice. Defragging can help, and there are several of the defrag vendors out there that have data to support this. I don't believe that the included Windows 'diskeeper lite' version will help much, but I don't have any personal experience to support this, only what I've heard from the list and others. If your data is pretty static, synthetic backups may be an option (but I don't know if I would do it!). I'm also interested in what PureDisk can do for these clients. I plan on testing this in a lab in the next few weeks and I'll share my findings when I get to that point. -Rusty From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mellor, Adam A. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 7:36 AM To: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Cc: Ed Wilts [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Veritas-bu] Speaking of NTFS: My backup systems are Solaris, I have the luxury of vxfs filesystems for my staging database areas. I do however back up Windows file servers, Are there any guidelines to NTFS volumes that people would recommend ? I thinking along the lines: Defragmenting, Number of streams, LUN Virtulization tech, Volume Sizes, Maintaining free space, Snapshot methods, impact of ohh sooo many small files Performance improvements with Advanced client / Flashbackup, SAN Media server, (For the adventurous) SAN client ? For example, i currently have pain with about a dozen windows clients, from what i can tell we do not do defragmentaion their LUNS live on HP EVA's sharing spindles with hosts Free Space is minimum (~7%) Volumes are only ~500GB We backup with Multiple streams (Exceeds weekend (and daily) backup window if we don't (Windows are large) Currently backing up the windows dataservers is a pain point for me, I am interested in hearing peoples learnings / Golden rules when it comes to backing up large (over 500GB) NTFS Volumes. Adam Mellor Senior Unix Support Analyst CF IT TECHNOLOGY SERVICES Woodside Energy Ltd. From: Ed Wilts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 14 February 2008 1:17 PM To: Mellor, Adam A. Cc: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Defrag DSU? On Feb 13, 2008 6:22 PM, Mellor, Adam A. wrote: Although I am not currently defragmenting my current DSU volumes, I previously had ~4TB in a single DSU under NBU 5.1 . This volume was running vxfs vxfs says it all, you lucky guy. NTFS just sucks... try a 4TB DSSU on Windows and see how much fun you have. I do like your idea of dropping the threshold to a low value to empty it out more frequently though. .../Ed -- Ed Wilts, Mounds View, MN, USA mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] NOTICE: This email and any attachments are confidential. They may contain legally privileged information or copyright material. You must not read, copy, use or disclose them without authorisation. If you are not an intended recipient, please contact us at once by return email and then delete both messages and all attachments. ___ 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] NetBackup changes
We do use tripwire. It gives us the what but not the who. One problem for auditing we've found is that the while the java gui can log the command strings, there's always the command line to circumvent. If you don't hand out root and only use the GUI, then you can add the -lc option to the jnbSA command line and log the commands it runs in the background. So, write a wrapper script to jnbSA, add the -lc option and a specific log file location like this and you're got something that might work. example: cat jnb /usr/openv/netbackup/bin/jnbSA -l /usr/openv/netbackup/logs/gui_logs/$USER.`date +%y%m%d%H%M%S` -lc ... It's not much but it keeps our auditors happy. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 9:34 AM To: 'Jimmy Stewpot'; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup changes You don't mention what OS, but perhaps tripwire or big brother would be of help. Regards, Patrick Whelan Whelan Consulting Limited VERITAS Certified NetBackup Support Engineer for UNIX. VERITAS Certified NetBackup Support Engineer for Microsoft Windows. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jimmy Stewpot Sent: 15 February 2008 15:37 To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup changes Hello, I am interested to know if anyone has or knows of any software which can easily track the changes made in netbackup. We have a fairly large install and would like to be able to track who makes changes to what and when for obvious reasons. I have had a look at the documentation but its not clear if its possible in the standard product. Does anyone have any advice that they can provide me? Regards, Jimmy ___ 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 maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Calculating amount of tapes I have written to with acertain retention level.
... Will try to create another disk unit on another media server host and see if it works. Same deal, even on the master server, created a little dsu, same error, looking into it. Justin. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu -- Message: 2 Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 09:01:03 -0500 From: Rosenkoetter, Gabriel [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State To: Randy Samora [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] roupinc.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii No, ALL_LOCAL_DRIVES includes the appropriate one of System_State:\ or Shadow Copy Components:\ based on how you've listed the client (Windows2000 v. WindowsNET, for example). Or, I think it's based on that. It might be based on what the client's bpcd says when the media server connects to it. (The docs are hazy. Ahem, Veri... er, Symantec readers.) -- gabriel rosenkoetter Radian Group Inc, Unix/Linux/VMware Sysadmin / Backup Recovery [EMAIL PROTECTED], 215 231 1556 _ From: Randy Samora [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 4:22 PM To: WEAVER, Simon (external) Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State I'm using the All Local Drives directive. Does it make a difference to list Shadow Copy Components separately? From: WEAVER, Simon (external) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 12:56 AM To: Randy Samora; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State Randy In the backup policy where this client belongs, are you selecting the Shadow Copy Components directive? S. _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Randy Samora Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 11:21 PM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State Part of my requirements are test restores of critical boxes in a lab environment. The lab is isolated and when I restore a client, there's not really much we can test because the client looks for the production network. Today I had to restore a Windows 2003 Server in the production environment and most of the registry wasn't restored; services and other objects were missing. With the test restores, I always had the option of doing an ntbackup of the System State and then I would run a full backup of the client. I'd take my tape to the lab, run a full restore, but before I rebooted the restored client, I restored the ntbackup of the System State (Shadow Copy Component.) That seemed to work just fine. But today when the server blew up, there was no opportunity to do an ntbackup of the SS first. I asked Symantec last year if the ntbackup was still needed and they said no, a full backup and restore should recover the client. I just never had the chance to test that theory. Am I missing a step? I installed the OS from a basic CD install, loaded the NBU client, and then did a full restore. But it's as if the system state was never restored so I'm wondering if I'm even backing it up. How can I tell? Do I need VSS or VSP activated in order to get a good copy of the system state? We turned VSP off over a year ago because we were having problems with the orphaned cache files. I've never gone back and changed the setting on most of the clients and my plans were to start using VSS but haven't gotten to that task either. Is there a trick or an added step to getting a good backup of the system state on a Windows 2003 Server server or is there a trick to restoring it? 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 -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/pipermail/veritas-bu/attachments/20080215/ e9edc0b8/attachment-0001.htm -- Message: 3 Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 09:05:43 -0500 (EST) From: Justin Piszcz [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] EMM status: Invalid pool To: Preston, Douglas L [EMAIL PROTECTED
Re: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State
Um... that's not how bpplclients works, Randy. The user must specify. -- gabriel rosenkoetter Radian Group Inc, Unix/Linux/VMware Sysadmin / Backup Recovery [EMAIL PROTECTED], 215 231 1556 _ From: Randy Samora [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 10:07 AM To: Ed Wilts; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State I don't think adding a new client is an issue. If I remember correctly, the default selection is for NetBackup to ask the client what OS is loaded. So if the lines of communication are open (and they should be) the OS should self-populate. But you're right, most of my discrepancies are from years of upgrades and no one tells the tape dude. From: Ed Wilts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 9:02 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Randy Samora; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 8:25 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, NBU will override the selection. We discovered that recently when we realized we had a bunch of Win2k servers mistakenly configured as Win2k3; System_State was still being backed up as opposed to Shadow Copy Components. I think you may have that backwards but that's besides the point. I actually have a formal change request into Symantec on this one - the backup admin should not be telling NetBackup what the OS type is when there's a NetBackup client sitting out there that knows exactly what it is. This gets even uglier when you have the client in multiple policies (common for clusters) and you have to keep them all updated on a regular basis. And I'm just willing to bet at least a cup of coffee that the vast majority of backup admins aren't told when an OS is upgraded. .../Ed -- Ed Wilts, Mounds View, MN, USA mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State
I just tried it again, maybe we're adding clients differently but in the GUI, the OS self-populates when I type in the client name and hit Enter. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rosenkoetter, Gabriel Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 11:38 AM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State Um... that's not how bpplclients works, Randy. The user must specify. -- gabriel rosenkoetter Radian Group Inc, Unix/Linux/VMware Sysadmin / Backup Recovery [EMAIL PROTECTED], 215 231 1556 From: Randy Samora [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 10:07 AM To: Ed Wilts; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State I don't think adding a new client is an issue. If I remember correctly, the default selection is for NetBackup to ask the client what OS is loaded. So if the lines of communication are open (and they should be) the OS should self-populate. But you're right, most of my discrepancies are from years of upgrades and no one tells the tape dude. From: Ed Wilts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 9:02 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Randy Samora; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 8:25 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, NBU will override the selection. We discovered that recently when we realized we had a bunch of Win2k servers mistakenly configured as Win2k3; System_State was still being backed up as opposed to Shadow Copy Components. I think you may have that backwards but that's besides the point. I actually have a formal change request into Symantec on this one - the backup admin should not be telling NetBackup what the OS type is when there's a NetBackup client sitting out there that knows exactly what it is. This gets even uglier when you have the client in multiple policies (common for clusters) and you have to keep them all updated on a regular basis. And I'm just willing to bet at least a cup of coffee that the vast majority of backup admins aren't told when an OS is upgraded. .../Ed -- Ed Wilts, Mounds View, MN, USA mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Speaking of NTFS:
Adam, all, If your NTFS volume is over 80% full, the performance starts to degrade. I've tested this and verified that it does happen. I didn't do enough testing with controls to truly characterize performance, but it can be demonstrated. At 85% full, you will notice a significant performance decrease. From 85% to 90% the performance will drop in half! It seems to be geometric once you hit 85%. Defragmenting will help the NTFS filesystem performance. Be aware, that the NTFS defrag likes to have 25% freespace. If you get up to 85% full, the defrag may not even run. You can now set up scheduled NTFS defrags with Win2003 - it wasn't possible without a 3rd party product until Win2003. Don't let the Windows guys use disk compression. Backup performance will go straight to h***. And, guess what happens if you do a large restore on a volume that has compression turned on? That's really fun. Many, many small files will kill performance. So will directory depth. Once I had a 500 GB NTFS filesystem that was taking 3 days to backup! And, incrementals would actually take longer. I laid out the steps we needed to run through to get it backed up. First of all, it was over 90% full. I told them they needed to use 75% full as their goal, including growth. When we migrated the data, we defragged it too. If I recall correctly we could then run a backup in about 18 hours or so. Then I set up Flashbackup using VSS. After all was said and done the Flashbackup would run in about 3 - 4 hours. I considered 3 days to 3 hours a fairly decent performance increase. It really operates very similar to a Flashbackup of VxFS, if you've ever done that. And if you do defrag with Flashbackup, only defrag prior to the full backup. If you turn on multi-streaming with Windows and do All Local Drives, it creates one stream per drive - C:, D:, etc... If your drives are separate disks, separate luns, that's ok. However, say the local disk space is coming off of a locally attached SCSI array where the disks are setup in RAID 0+1 or RAID 5, then the RAID disk is split up to create different disks for the server. All multi-streaming will do for you in that case is increase disk contention. If your disk is coming off of a large array, like a DMX, Clariion, EVA or such, this is not as much an issue, although it can be if your various luns are coming off of the same set of spindles. Large Windows file servers rarely get good disk I/O performance. It has been steadily improving, but I have usually seen the network I/O exceed the disk I/O. DB servers are the exceptions to this. Large SQL or Oracle servers can usually generate a much faster I/O stream, everything else begin equal. SAN media servers? High cost that _may_ give you a performance increase. Make sure you can read from your disk faster than your network throughput. With tuning, a decent Windows server should be able to send out in excess of 60 MB/s over GigE. Make sure you can read from your disk(s) that fast before you spend the money on the SAN backup solution. Bryan My backup systems are Solaris, I have the luxury of vxfs filesystems for my staging database areas. I do however back up Windows file servers, Are there any guidelines to NTFS volumes that people would recommend ? I thinking along the lines: Defragmenting, Number of streams, LUN Virtulization tech, Volume Sizes, Maintaining free space, Snapshot methods, impact of ohh sooo many small files Performance improvements with Advanced client / Flashbackup, SAN Media server, (For the adventurous) SAN client ? For example, i currently have pain with about a dozen windows clients, from what i can tell we do not do defragmentaion their LUNS live on HP EVA's sharing spindles with hosts Free Space is minimum (~7%) Volumes are only ~500GB We backup with Multiple streams (Exceeds weekend (and daily) backup window if we don't (Windows are large) Currently backing up the windows dataservers is a pain point for me, I am interested in hearing peoples learnings / Golden rules when it comes to backing up large (over 500GB) NTFS Volumes. Adam Mellor Senior Unix Support Analyst CF IT TECHNOLOGY SERVICES Woodside Energy Ltd. From: Ed Wilts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 14 February 2008 1:17 PM To: Mellor, Adam A. Cc: VERITAS-BU@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Defrag DSU? On Feb 13, 2008 6:22 PM, Mellor, Adam A. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Although I am not currently defragmenting my current DSU volumes, I previously had ~4TB in a single DSU under NBU 5.1 . This volume was running vxfs vxfs says it all, you lucky guy. NTFS just sucks... try a 4TB DSSU on Windows and see how much fun you have. I do like your idea
Re: [Veritas-bu] Calculating amount of tapes I have written to with acertain retention level.
, same error, looking into it. Justin. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu -- Message: 2 Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 09:01:03 -0500 From: Rosenkoetter, Gabriel [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State To: Randy Samora [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] roupinc.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii No, ALL_LOCAL_DRIVES includes the appropriate one of System_State:\ or Shadow Copy Components:\ based on how you've listed the client (Windows2000 v. WindowsNET, for example). Or, I think it's based on that. It might be based on what the client's bpcd says when the media server connects to it. (The docs are hazy. Ahem, Veri... er, Symantec readers.) -- gabriel rosenkoetter Radian Group Inc, Unix/Linux/VMware Sysadmin / Backup Recovery [EMAIL PROTECTED], 215 231 1556 _ From: Randy Samora [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 4:22 PM To: WEAVER, Simon (external) Cc: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State I'm using the All Local Drives directive. Does it make a difference to list Shadow Copy Components separately? From: WEAVER, Simon (external) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 12:56 AM To: Randy Samora; veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State Randy In the backup policy where this client belongs, are you selecting the Shadow Copy Components directive? S. _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Randy Samora Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 11:21 PM To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Restoring Shadow Copy Component/System State Part of my requirements are test restores of critical boxes in a lab environment. The lab is isolated and when I restore a client, there's not really much we can test because the client looks for the production network. Today I had to restore a Windows 2003 Server in the production environment and most of the registry wasn't restored; services and other objects were missing. With the test restores, I always had the option of doing an ntbackup of the System State and then I would run a full backup of the client. I'd take my tape to the lab, run a full restore, but before I rebooted the restored client, I restored the ntbackup of the System State (Shadow Copy Component.) That seemed to work just fine. But today when the server blew up, there was no opportunity to do an ntbackup of the SS first. I asked Symantec last year if the ntbackup was still needed and they said no, a full backup and restore should recover the client. I just never had the chance to test that theory. Am I missing a step? I installed the OS from a basic CD install, loaded the NBU client, and then did a full restore. But it's as if the system state was never restored so I'm wondering if I'm even backing it up. How can I tell? Do I need VSS or VSP activated in order to get a good copy of the system state? We turned VSP off over a year ago because we were having problems with the orphaned cache files. I've never gone back and changed the setting on most of the clients and my plans were to start using VSS but haven't gotten to that task either. Is there a trick or an added step to getting a good backup of the system state on a Windows 2003 Server server or is there a trick to restoring it? 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 -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/pipermail/veritas-bu/attachments/20080215/ e9edc0b8/attachment-0001.htm -- Message: 3 Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 09:05:43 -0500 (EST) From: Justin Piszcz [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] EMM status: Invalid pool To: Preston, Douglas L [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Martin, Jonathan [EMAIL PROTECTED], veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US
[Veritas-bu] Exchange 2007 Snapshot backups
I was just wondering if anyone out there is successfully doing Exchange 2007 snapshot backups yet? I am working with a client and we are trying to get them to work without any luck so far. We have applied the Storage Foundation 5.0 hot fix, as well as two binaries. One that replaced the vxcmd.dll and executable and one that replaced the vxcmd64.dll. Right now it is in the hands of the Symantec Engineering team. Just wondering if there is anyone that has actually made it work. Our environment: Exchange Server: Exchange 2007, running on Windows 2003 Enterprise Server 64-bit with SP2. Runnning Storage Foundations HA 5.0 for Windows with all the patches mentioned above. NetBackup Servers: Netbackup 6.5.1, running on Windows 2003 Enterprise Server 64-bit with SP2. Runnning Storage Foundations HA 5.0 for Windows with all the patches mentioned above. Backups continue to fail with the following messages: 16:54:28.065 [7072.7052] 2 1202853265 onlfi_vfms_logf: Enter SetDgName! 16:54:28.065 [7072.7052] 2 1202853265 onlfi_vfms_logf: Input disk group name: [newdg_dg]! 16:54:28.065 [7072.7052] 2 1202853265 onlfi_vfms_logf: Exit SetDgName -- successfully! 16:54:28.065 [7072.7052] 2 1202853265 onlfi_vfms_logf: Enter SplitDg! 16:54:28.065 [7072.7052] 2 1202853265 onlfi_vfms_logf: Enter CheckDgExist! 16:54:28.065 [7072.7052] 2 1202853265 onlfi_vfms_logf: Exit CheckDgExist! 16:54:28.065 [7072.7052] 2 1202853265 onlfi_vfms_logf: Enter CreateDgSplitName! 16:54:28.065 [7072.7052] 2 1202853265 onlfi_vfms_logf: [Max Allowed = 18][Appending = 14][OriginalName = 10]! 16:54:28.065 [7072.7052] 2 1202853265 onlfi_vfms_logf: Enter CheckDgExist! 16:54:28.065 [7072.7052] 2 1202853265 onlfi_vfms_logf: Exit CheckDgExist! 16:54:28.065 [7072.7052] 2 1202853265 onlfi_vfms_logf: The new split Disk group name is [newdg2_dg_000]! 16:54:28.065 [7072.7052] 2 1202853265 onlfi_vfms_logf: Exit CreateDgSplitName! 16:54:28.065 [7072.7052] 2 1202853265 onlfi_vfms_logf: VM_DGSplit with DGName_ = newdg2_dg TargetDgName = mbqasg2_dg_000! 16:54:28.065 [7072.7052] 2 1202853266 onlfi_vfms_logf: Volume Manager disk group split operation failed! 16:54:28.065 [7072.7052] 2 1202853266 onlfi_vfms_logf: SFW SDK error code: [0xe5150047]! 16:54:28.065 [7072.7052] 2 1202853266 onlfi_vfms_logf: Volume Manager error code: [0xe5150047]! 16:54:28.065 [7072.7052] 2 1202853266 onlfi_vfms_logf: SplitDg! 16:54:28.065 [7072.7052] 2 1202853266 onlfi_vfms_logf: VssSnapshotVolume::BuildTransportXMLDoc() - done. LastError_: 3758130475 16:54:28.065 [7072.7052] 2 1202853266 onlfi_vfms_logf: ERR - vss__snap: could not build transport XML document 16:54:28.065 [7072.7052] 2 1202853266 onlfi_vfms_logf: VSS_Writer_freeze_commit: snapshot create failed 16:54:28.065 [7072.7052] 32 1202853268 onlfi_fim_split: VfMS error 11; see following messages: 16:54:28.065 [7072.7052] 32 1202853268 onlfi_fim_split: Fatal method error was reported 16:54:28.065 [7072.7052] 32 1202853268 onlfi_fim_split: vfm_freeze_commit: method: VSS_Writer, type: FIM, function: VSS_Writer_freeze_commit 16:54:28.065 [7072.7052] 32 1202853268 onlfi_fim_split: VfMS method error 4; see following message: 16:54:28.065 [7072.7052] 32 1202853268 onlfi_fim_split: VSS_Writer_freeze_commit: snapshot create failed Final error: 16:54:36.065 [7072.7052] 2 onlfi_vfms_logf: Extended status = 130:1:Could not build transport XML document. 16:54:36.065 [7072.7052] 16 bpfis main: FTL - snapshot creation failed - Could not build transport XML document., status 130 16:54:36.065 [7072.7052] 16 bpfis main: FTL - snapshot creation failed, status 130 Reneé Carlisle ServerWare Corporation ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
[Veritas-bu] Rollback to 6.0 Plan, in case 6.5 flakes out
Hello all, I am planning on upgrading my NetBackup servers from 6.0 MP4 to 6.5 and I am wondering if there is a roll back to 6.0 option? Is it enough to back up the c:\Program Files\VERITAS or /usr/openv directories to a new location and put them back in case of a water landing? I was going to ghost/flash archive the boxes, but that seems like a bit of overkill. Thoughts? Suggestions? Thanks, Kyle ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] NetBackup changes
You don't mention what OS, but perhaps tripwire or big brother would be of help. Regards, Patrick Whelan Whelan Consulting Limited VERITAS Certified NetBackup Support Engineer for UNIX. VERITAS Certified NetBackup Support Engineer for Microsoft Windows. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jimmy Stewpot Sent: 15 February 2008 15:37 To: veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu Subject: [Veritas-bu] Netbackup changes Hello, I am interested to know if anyone has or knows of any software which can easily track the changes made in netbackup. We have a fairly large install and would like to be able to track who makes changes to what and when for obvious reasons. I have had a look at the documentation but its not clear if its possible in the standard product. Does anyone have any advice that they can provide me? Regards, Jimmy ___ 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] Upgrading NetBackup 6.0m4 to 6.5 [With a Twist]
Long ago, I started with NetBackup 3.4 running on a Enterprise 450 running Solaris 2.6 system. Over the years I've upgraded the OS to Solaris 8, and NetBackup to 4.5, then 5.1, and finally to 6.0mp4. Now I plan on taking several leaps, but am indecisive on how to take them. One leap, is from 6.0mp4 to 6.5. A second leap is from the Enterprise 450 to a Enterprise T5220. A third leap is from Solaris 8 to Solaris 10. [This leap is tied to the change in platform, I won't be able to upgrade the E450 to Solaris 10 and the minimum OS for the T5220 is Solaris 10.] I have NetBackup in /usr/openv on the operating system disk. I have the catalog (/usr/openv/netbackup/db), as a volume I mount from my SAN. Now for the choice I have to make: 1) Do I install 6.0mp4 on the T5220. Mount the catalog on the T5220 test it out, and then upgrade when satisfied? 2) Do I upgrade the E450 to 6.5, test it out, install 6.5 on the T5220 and move over the catalog, test and roll it out? 3) Or will it be safe to just install 6.5 on the T5220, move over the 6.0 catalog, and run with it. And finally, any tools to migrate NetBackup from one host to another? are the policies defined in the catalog (/usr/openv/netbackup/db) or am going to have to record them by had, and recreate them from scratch? begin:vcard fn:Matthew Stier n:Stier;Matthew org:Fujitsu Network Communications;CAE adr:Sixth Floor;;Two Blue Hill Plaza;Pearl River;NY;10965;USA email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] title:Principal Engineer tel;work:845-731-2097 tel;fax:845-731-2011 tel;cell:845-893-0575 x-mozilla-html:TRUE version:2.1 end:vcard ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Rollback to 6.0 Plan, in case 6.5 flakes out
I do not think you'll have any issues with 6.0 to 6.5. The (main) problem wasthe database conversiondone when going to 6.x froma pre 6.0 versoin.With that said, I think a catalog backup and a copy of your /usr/openv directory should be sufficient. -Rusty From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kyle Oliver [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 2:34 PMTo: netbackup list veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.eduSubject: [Veritas-bu] Rollback to 6.0 Plan, in case 6.5 flakes out Hello all, I am planning on upgrading my NetBackup servers from 6.0 MP4 to 6.5 and I am wondering if there is a roll back to 6.0 option? Is it enough to back up the c:\Program Files\VERITAS or /usr/openv directories to a new location and put them back in case of a water landing? I was going to ghost/flash archive the boxes, but that seems like a bit of overkill. Thoughts? Suggestions? Thanks, Kyle ___ 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] Rollback to 6.0 Plan, in case 6.5 flakes out
Kylie, I can understand that disk space may not be available, however: Disk mirroring. Utilising disk mirroring, I have always found this the best rollback method for most changes. Again, I have the luxury of veritas volume manager, and mirroring / splitting pairs is relativly easy. If this is possible, it does cover every change done to the system (except DSSU with would not get mirrored). Catches with this are, you lose resiliance while you are down to a single drive (un-mirrored), unless you can get a ternary mirror / spare disks to replace the one you split off (which you keep for your backout). ** Has anybodyd asked, can a 6.5 catalogue be imported back into 6.0 ? If so, then what versions of NBU (or other systems) allow you to import the catalogue from a newer versions ( 5.1 into 5.0 ? 5 into 4.5 ?). My understanding is no you can't Based on my understanding of the catalogue issue, the longer you leave it to backout, the more work is involved in getting back. If you leave your backout for a week (being used in production for 7days/nights) you can simply go back to your backup/mirror disk, however you have lost a weeks worth of backups. Or before you backout, you take a note of all the tapes / backup images created since the upgrade, and after reverting to 6.0 doing the two reads of every tape modified and manually importing the images. Note this may not even be supported by symantec (import into 6, images created in 6.5). When I have done big changes to my systems, I generally give it 24 hours, if I need to go back, after the backout, I ensure I get a full backup of the critical DB's, and a successful incremental of filesysystems that matter.) If there are issues after this point, then I see it as falling forward. Adam. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kyle Oliver Sent: Saturday, 16 February 2008 5:34 AM To: netbackup list Subject: [Veritas-bu] Rollback to 6.0 Plan, in case 6.5 flakes out Hello all, I am planning on upgrading my NetBackup servers from 6.0 MP4 to 6.5 and I am wondering if there is a roll back to 6.0 option? Is it enough to back up the c:\Program Files\VERITAS or /usr/openv directories to a new location and put them back in case of a water landing? I was going to ghost/flash archive the boxes, but that seems like a bit of overkill. Thoughts? Suggestions? Thanks, Kyle ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu NOTICE: This email and any attachments are confidential. They may contain legally privileged information or copyright material. You must not read, copy, use or disclose them without authorisation. If you are not an intended recipient, please contact us at once by return email and then delete both messages and all attachments. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
Re: [Veritas-bu] Rollback to 6.0 Plan, in case 6.5 flakes out
Another point to keep in mind is that 6.0 - 6.5 does a conversion of the images on your DSSUs (the .ds files go away). Frankly my approach with the last two 6.0 - 6.5 migrations has been to focus on going forward: fix it if it breaks rather than thinking about rolling back. Our 6.5 experience has been very positive thus far with the upgrade from 6.0MP4/5 quite painless. This is not like the 5.x - 6.0experience!! --Larry On 2/15/08, Mellor, Adam A. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Kylie, I can understand that disk space may not be available, however: Disk mirroring. Utilising disk mirroring, I have always found this the best rollback method for most changes. Again, I have the luxury of veritas volume manager, and mirroring / splitting pairs is relativly easy. If this is possible, it does cover every change done to the system (except DSSU with would not get mirrored). Catches with this are, you lose resiliance while you are down to a single drive (un-mirrored), unless you can get a ternary mirror / spare disks to replace the one you split off (which you keep for your backout). ** Has anybodyd asked, can a 6.5 catalogue be imported back into 6.0 ? If so, then what versions of NBU (or other systems) allow you to import the catalogue from a newer versions ( 5.1 into 5.0 ? 5 into 4.5 ?). My understanding is no you can't Based on my understanding of the catalogue issue, the longer you leave it to backout, the more work is involved in getting back. If you leave your backout for a week (being used in production for 7days/nights) you can simply go back to your backup/mirror disk, however you have lost a weeks worth of backups. Or before you backout, you take a note of all the tapes / backup images created since the upgrade, and after reverting to 6.0 doing the two reads of every tape modified and manually importing the images. Note this may not even be supported by symantec (import into 6, images created in 6.5). When I have done big changes to my systems, I generally give it 24 hours, if I need to go back, after the backout, I ensure I get a full backup of the critical DB's, and a successful incremental of filesysystems that matter.) If there are issues after this point, then I see it as falling forward. Adam. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kyle Oliver Sent: Saturday, 16 February 2008 5:34 AM To: netbackup list Subject: [Veritas-bu] Rollback to 6.0 Plan, in case 6.5 flakes out Hello all, I am planning on upgrading my NetBackup servers from 6.0 MP4 to 6.5 and I am wondering if there is a roll back to 6.0 option? Is it enough to back up the c:\Program Files\VERITAS or /usr/openv directories to a new location and put them back in case of a water landing? I was going to ghost/flash archive the boxes, but that seems like a bit of overkill. Thoughts? Suggestions? Thanks, Kyle ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu NOTICE: This email and any attachments are confidential. They may contain legally privileged information or copyright material. You must not read, copy, use or disclose them without authorisation. If you are not an intended recipient, please contact us at once by return email and then delete both messages and all attachments. ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu -- Larry Fahnoe, Fahnoe Technology Consulting, [EMAIL PROTECTED] 952/925-0744 Minneapolis, Minnesota www.FahnoeTech.com ___ Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu@mailman.eng.auburn.edu http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
