In regard to: Re: [Networker] best platform for newest networker?, Tim...:

> The environment I work in has lots of Linux experience.  We've been using
> a Linux-based server for our NetWorker server (now servers) for several
> years.  It hasn't been a mistake for us, at all.

We have got lots of in-house Linux experience too and a few hundreds of 
Linux machines in the datacenter.
Over the past few year, we did enjoyed the capital saving, thank to the cheap 
Networker licensing cost model on Linux platform.

> Agreed.  For what you pay to buy one decent SPARC box with the right
> I/O layout, you can probably buy an x86 server (again, watch the I/O
> config) plus 2-3 storage nodes.

So we end up having 10 x86 servers + a few storage nodes with SAN-based 
backup infrastructure plus DDS, AFTD, VTL and PTL.
In our environment we have got all the major Unix, RHEL, Windows... 
quite a lots of client.

> Because you actually have *choice* for hardware with Linux, you have to
> be more careful in your hardware selection.  If you select the right
> vendor for your hardware, you should be able to avoid any finger pointing.

Yes, we've picked the tier-1 hardware vendor plus EMC e-lab compliance.

> I don't know what you're getting at here, so I can't comment.  What,
> exactly, are you hot-plugging on your backup server?  Entire I/O boards?

Hardware management layer similar to AIX, HPUX, Tru64 and Solaris.
Hot plug PCI-x, adding new FC disk or FC tape drive without reboot under 
persistent binding.

> I've said it before on this list -- I think the biggest challenge for
> using an x86-based backup server (Linux or otherwise) is finding a box with
> the right I/O layout.  It can be a challenge finding an x86 box that
> doesn't have all the onboard NICs, SCSI/SAS controllers, and half the PCI
> slots all on one bus.

Agreed, normally FC HBAs and GbE NICs fill up most of our PCI-x slots on these 
machines.
Stage a few TBs worth of data on the daily basis can be very I/O intensive.

> I'm no Linux zealot (though I work with a few), but I think it's
> disingenuous to make such a blanket statement about Linux as a NetWorker
> server.  It's no utopia, but in the right environment, using Linux on your
> NetWorker server can make a lot of sense and work very well.

Maybe we are the unlucky one.

> We've been doing it for years, and frankly, the kinds of problems we've
> had with NetWorker have been the problems that impact all the other
> NetWorker platforms equally.  My headaches are generally with EMC, not
> Linux, or Red Hat, or Sun, or <insert other vendor here>

I am hoping that EMC will fix the recent bugs we have got here soon.
Our recent problems impact Networker on Linux platform only.

regards
VL




      
____________________________________________________________________________________
Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page. 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs

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 with 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