Networker

Re: [Networker] NetWorker + Windows SAN Tapes

2006-09-06 11:58:24
Subject: Re: [Networker] NetWorker + Windows SAN Tapes
From: Davina Treiber <DavinaTreiber AT PEEVRO.CO DOT UK>
To: NETWORKER AT LISTSERV.TEMPLE DOT EDU
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2006 16:54:52 +0100
Gaddy wrote:

Davina wrote:
Persistent binding is not sufficient to totally solve this problem.

Persistent binding locks down the binding of
WWPN or WWNN to SCSI b.t.l addresses.
It does not control the mapping of SCSI addresses
to Windows device names.

YES, Davina matches exactly the point
(which she does most of the time :-)
[ enjoy your postings very much -sg-]
**blush**

Persistent binding would only help, if NetWorker
could work with physical addresses like [email protected].
Persistent binding does help, sorry if I implied that it doesn't. Persistent binding is a "good thing" and should always be used. It reduces the problem and prevents devices from moving around due to purely SAN related issues, it just doesn't solve the whole problem.

Unfortunately it could not, or could it? [ TSM can :-(  ]
I heard some years ago about a new feature of 7.x that Legato called "device serialisation". I am still unclear what this feature actually offers and how it can be used. Does anyone know?

Changing the OS type is NOT an option,
because investment in 250++ servers (many 4-/8-way) is already huge.
Fair enough, and Windows is a fully supported platform that should be possible to configure for tape devices in s stable manner.

So I'm still looking for other Wintel NetWorkers
who have to deal with the problem and have found ways to ease the pain a bit.
This is in fact a Microsoft problem, but it ought to be possible for EMC to come up with a robust solution to it. You have hit the nail on the head in your last message, we need to be able to configure tape devices in NetWorker based on their SCSI addresses rather than via the rather flaky method of using Windows device names such as \\.\Tape0. I don't think this is possible using current NetWorker releases, perhaps EMC should be looking at this for a future version. I would _love_ to be proved wrong on this issue....

To sign off this list, send email to listserv AT listserv.temple DOT edu and type 
"signoff networker" in the
body of the email. Please write to networker-request AT listserv.temple DOT edu 
if you have any problems
wit this list. You can access the archives at 
http://listserv.temple.edu/archives/networker.html or
via RSS at http://listserv.temple.edu/cgi-bin/wa?RSS&L=NETWORKER