Well, until last week they did not support DAR.  This is an indication
of their commitment to NDMP (or lack of) since every other major backup
vendor had supported DAR over a year ago.  And dynamic drive sharing for
NDMP?  Don't look for that for another year even though NetVault from
Backbone had it a year ago as well.

For some reason, Veritas sees themselves as a competitor of NetApp even
though their NAS product is light years behind a filer.

The scripting in NBU is pretty decent so you will win on that front.
The client push only works for the same platform as the master.  So in a
mixed environment you will still visit the clients that are a differing
platform than the master.

I will say this, the write format alone might be worth it.  I have had
to recover data from the catalogue tapes many times using tar rather
than NBU.

~JK

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Deb [mailto:deb AT tickleme.llnl DOT gov]
> Sent: Friday, January 24, 2003 12:48 PM
> To: veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
> Subject: Re: [Veritas-bu] Considering moving to NetBackup
> 
> I want to thank everyone for their responsses so far - keep 'em coming
> though.
> 
> First of all let me respond to Jeff's inquiry, "Is there something in
> particular that's got you irritated enough to migrate an entire
enterprise
> to
> a different software?"
> 
> A lot of things.  Here's a list of just a few (from the Sun side of
> things):
> 
> 1. With over 200 clients, updating them from one release to the next
> requires
>    going to each client (via login of some kind) and doing an
interactive
>    pkgadd.  I'm told that NBU allows client updates to be "pushed
out."
> This
>    would save a lot of time, and be version reliable.
> 
> 2. Version control is an issue with LGTO - if you get a patch for
> something,
>    there is not centrally located way to track which box has what
patch,
> and
>    it is usually not in pkg format.  LGTO just doesn't track version
> changes,
>    such as date and time and version.
> 
> 3. Scripting *can* be a nightmare - while some folks love mminfo, it
takes
> a
>    long time to get the incantations correct, and nsradmin -i is a
joke,
> and
>    not easily scripted.  There may be a perl module out there with
bells
> and
>    whistles, but I've yet to find it.
> 
> 4. Size limitations on directives.
> 
> 5. Installing devices and jukeboxes are a nightmare - if you mistype
> something
>    in during jbconfig, you must start all over again from the
beginning.
>    LGTO doesn't support drive serialization.
> 
> 6. LGTO doesn't support MacOS clients, NBU has support.
> 
> 7. LGTO cannot stage to disk w/o purchasing an option, NBU can stage,
need
>    other products to to automatic staging, however.
> 
> 8. LGTO writes in proprietary format to tapes, NBU is modified
gnu-tar.
> 
> 9. Takes forever to pre-label legato tapes PRIOR to backup.  NBU does
it
> at
>    backup time (less SA intervention).
> 
> As for NDMP - that is something I am interested in - however, if NBU
has
> lousy
> support for that, we'd most likely use LGTO.
> 
> I'd be interested in what the NBU issues are with NDMP.  I didn't know
> that
> there ARE issues in this area!!
> 
> Comments, Suggestion, Jokes ??  :-)
> 
> Thanks, guys,
> 
> deb
> _______________________________________________
> Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
> http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu