I have my nodes in mscs clusters in my regular ALL_LOCAL_DRIVES system
policies, but I have policy specific exclusions for the cluster resource
drives on them. I then have specific policies for each cluster with the
specific disk resources in its backup selections corresponding with the
virtual name associated with that resource group. It works quite well,
and you can do your flashbackups, exchange, SQL or what have you of the
virtual server names on the cluster.

If we didn't use the policy scoped disk exclusions with the
ALL_LOCAL_DRIVES  system policies, the non-active nodes would attempt to
backup those drives and fail.

On 5/13/2010 4:17 PM, judy_hinchcliffe AT administaff DOT com wrote:
> Yes, that is the way NB says they should be backed up.
> I had to work this out on 3.5, they had a doc that explained it.
>
> I have policies that backup physical server to get C:\ and Shadow copy 
> components
> Then I have policies that backup via the virtual name to get the resources.
>
> So with two physical servers
> One policy to get C and SCC
>
> One policy to get the resources of the first virtual name
> One policy to get the resource of the second virtual name.
>
> You could also do this in one policy if you wanted to work with the exclude 
> list for each server.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: veritas-bu-bounces AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu 
> [mailto:veritas-bu-bounces AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu] On Behalf Of Costa
> Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2010 10:54 AM
> To: VERITAS-BU AT MAILMAN.ENG.AUBURN DOT EDU
> Subject: [Veritas-bu] NBU 6.5 and MSCS Cluster
>
>
> We have a 3-node MSCS Cluster and at any given moment the 9 shares that the 
> cluster is presenting can be located across the 3-nodes. Meaning that drives 
> F, G, and H can be on node-1, drives I, J and K on node-2, and drives M, N 
> and O on node-3.  
>
> My question is if this situation is in place and we create a policy using the 
> virtual name that the shares are being presented as will NBU be smart enough 
> to backup these drives from these 3-nodes under the single virtual name?
>
> Thank You in advance
>
> Chris C
>
> +----------------------------------------------------------------------
> |This was sent by ccosta.ccc AT gmail DOT com via Backup Central.
> |Forward SPAM to abuse AT backupcentral DOT com.
> +----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
> http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
> http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
>   

_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu