Your assumptions are right on, everything is in one datacenter.
I think the direction I am taking is acceptable, and hopefully I have
made enough of the right decisions to allow a good foundation to build
on. Unfortunately, with NW, you won't know that until you run into the
next roadblock.
I'm glad to hear that we share the same view of NW and its capabilities,
or lack thereof. I can't imagine what I would do if it wasn't for this
listserv.
Have a great day.
-----Original Message-----
From: Francis Swasey [mailto:Frank.Swasey AT uvm DOT edu]
Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2008 11:21 AM
To: Bruce Breidall
Cc: EMC NetWorker discussion
Subject: Re: [Networker] Cloning question
Bruce,
The one thing you don't say, but I'm inferring from your words that your
backup system is in close proximity to the systems you are backing up.
If that is the case, I see what you are trying to do, and I am sadly not
aware enough of exactly how NetWorker manages the tapes and the
retentions to intelligently provide further input on whether it will
work or not. I know that from my point of view, NetWorker should be
smart enough to see that this is a single copy and other copies exist of
this SSID and therefore, the tape should expire and be ready to be
recycled in three days -- but I've been sorely disappointed in
NetWorker's true capabilities repeatedly.
Frank
On 4/15/08 11:01 AM, Bruce Breidall wrote:
> Thanks for the input.
>
> Since the ssretent is greater than the clretent, the clone savesets
are
> still fully browseable and recoverable even after the clretent
> "expires". The savesets won't be recycled until the ssretent time is
> passed. This is why I was thinking to force a new ssretent on the
clone
> ssids to make it easier to find tapes coming back. Otherwise, I need
to
> include logic on determining expiration based on clretent, instead of
> making NW work for me and automatically recycling the clone ssids.
Much
> easier to query that.
>
> It's a shame that we have to deal with this at all. Most other backup
> products have built in DR management. My main goal, since I am forced
to
> create a DR process around cloning, is to keep things as simple as
> possible.
>
> The reason I picked 3 days is because this is for DR. You need the
last
> full and the last incremental (L9) to build a system. With L9s, I
don't
> have to keep several days to build the system. I figured 3 days to
> guarantee I have something offsite - one tape going off, one in the
> vault, and one coming back at all times - same philosophy with the
> fulls, but they would be 3 weeks since they are taken weekly.
>
> We have limited resources, so I was trying to take a conservative
> approach by first splitting up test and prod, and then going with
these
> offsite rotations that I explained. I am not certain this is the best
> approach, because of what I don't know about NW. Conceptually it seems
> OK to me.
>
> Any additional comments are welcome. This is a very subjective topic
you
> can't run by support, and there are no local EMC legato experts to go
> over DR/cloning concepts without being charged an arm and a leg. All
we
> have is this listserv and any peer relationships you may be lucky
enough
> to have.
>
> Many thanks.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Francis Swasey [mailto:Frank.Swasey AT uvm DOT edu]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2008 8:04 AM
> To: EMC NetWorker discussion; Bruce Breidall
> Subject: Re: [Networker] Cloning question
>
> On 4/14/08 4:13 PM, Bruce Breidall wrote:
>> Assume that I manually cloned a saveset that has a browse and
> retention of
>> 91 days, but the clone pool has a retention of 3 days. If I cloned
> that
>> savest today, the ssretent would be today +91, and the clretent would
> be
>> today+3.
>>
>> When it is time to figure out which volumes to pick to come back
> onsite,
>> and you used mminfo to determine which volumes in the clone pool
>> have "expired" in terms of the clretent", could you then just relable
> that
>> tape into your SCRATCH pool and mark it recyclable without messing
> with
>> the original savesets that have a much greater retention? Would it be
>> better to set an actual ssretent on the cloned savesets via the
> nsrclone
>> command, in addition to specifying the retention time on the clone
> pool?
>
> I believe NetWorker will figure out which ones have expired based on
the
>
> clretent and you will be fine with relabeling those tapes into your
> SCRATCH pool. If you change the ssretent, you change it for ALL
clones
> of the ssid. Your description sounds like you don't want to do that.
>
>> What I am trying to do is separate clients by prod and test groups
and
>
>> pools, and manually clone only the prod data. Since we do fulls once
> per
>> week, and L9s the other 6 days, I wanted to try and have a three week
>> offsite rotation for the fulls and a 3 day rotation on the incrs.
>
> If you only want the incrs for 3 days -- why bother to clone them at
> all?
>
>> Does this sound feasible to anyone? Thanks.
>>
>> 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
>
--
Frank Swasey | http://www.uvm.edu/~fcs
Sr Systems Administrator | Always remember: You are UNIQUE,
University of Vermont | just like everyone else.
"I am not young enough to know everything." - Oscar Wilde (1854-1900)
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
|
