Author: Francis Swasey <Frank.Swasey AT UVM DOT EDU>
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 17:22:27 -0400
Sadly, no. The nsrstage will serialize their use of the single RO side of the AFTD. With multiple nsrstage processes trying to access the same AFTD, you will get alerts that they are waiting for the
Author: Curtis Preston <cpreston AT GLASSHOUSE DOT COM>
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 18:16:27 -0400
Well, that significantly decreases the value of AFTDs over VTLs in NetWorker, now doesn't it? ________________________________________________________ Curtis Preston | VP Data Protection GlassHouse T
Well, that significantly decreases the value of AFTDs over VTLs in NetWorker, now doesn't it? I have no experience with a VTL, but my impression is that you get the same functionality as physical ta
Author: Preston de Guise <enterprise.backup AT GMAIL DOT COM>
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 08:47:53 +1000
Well, that significantly decreases the value of AFTDs over VTLs in NetWorker, now doesn't it? I have no experience with a VTL, but my impression is that you get the same functionality as physical ta
Author: Curtis Preston <cpreston AT GLASSHOUSE DOT COM>
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 19:21:08 -0400
So an AFTD can service multiple concurrent restore requests, but can't service multiple destaging/cloning requests? I still say the VTL is easier. The difference is that a backup associated with a gi
Author: Preston de Guise <enterprise.backup AT GMAIL DOT COM>
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 09:37:27 +1000
So an AFTD can service multiple concurrent restore requests, but can't service multiple destaging/cloning requests? Yes. I still say the VTL is easier. The difference is that a backup associated with
Author: Francis Swasey <Frank.Swasey AT UVM DOT EDU>
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 21:12:58 -0400
With VTL, Networker limits you to one operation at a time per virtual Tape. I've heard tales that if you are lucky enough to issue two recover commands at the exact same instant, that NetWorker can b
Author: Curtis Preston <cpreston AT GLASSHOUSE DOT COM>
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 23:27:33 -0400
If the VTLs I test could only supply data at 40 MB/s, I wouldn't recommend them either. The ability of a disk device to stream to tape is job #1, AFAIC. Just remember that not all VTLs are created eq
Author: Preston de Guise <enterprise.backup AT GMAIL DOT COM>
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 13:46:36 +1000
1. Most people don't do more than one restore a month, let alone more than one a day, let ALONE two at the same time. 2. Add to that the odds that the two restores you do at the same time would need
Author: tkimball <networker-forum AT BACKUPCENTRAL DOT COM>
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 06:32:17 -0400
I effectively use my AFTDs as an HSM - or more accurately, a data warehouse (about 30 TB of database dumps). We don't do 400+ recovers in a day, but 60+ a day and 400+ a month would not be pushing it
Author: Francis Swasey <Frank.Swasey AT UVM DOT EDU>
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 07:29:33 -0400
Curtis, To be clear, I don't hate VTL's either. I just haven't found one yet that I feel comfortable using here. I don't think I have a small environment. I have a Qualstar XLS tape library with 12 L
Author: Francis Swasey <Frank.Swasey AT UVM DOT EDU>
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 07:41:38 -0400
- Run multiple stage operations - Run multiple clone operations - Failover a saveset from one DBU to another if it fills - Better balance backups so that a small number of DBUs see a disproportionate
Author: Fazil Saiyed <Fazil.Saiyed AT ANIXTER DOT COM>
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 08:38:19 -0500
Hello, In my opinion, AFTD may be easier to manage and have cost advantage over VTL's, especially, if Data Domain type of disk's are used for AFTD, since, there is little if any configuration to mana
Author: Fazil Saiyed <Fazil.Saiyed AT ANIXTER DOT COM>
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 09:07:42 -0500
I completely agree with Preston, but i am curious to find out if any other comparable backup software offer this benefits of AFTD now, how does networker compare to say commvault, netbackup and TSM's
Author: Bruce Breidall <Bruce.Breidall AT CONCUR DOT COM>
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 07:30:38 -0700
Comparing Networker to TSM or any of those other products is like comparing a tricycle to a BMW F 650 GS. I completely agree with Preston, but i am curious to find out if any other comparable backup
Author: Davina Treiber <Davina.Treiber AT PEEVRO.CO DOT UK>
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 15:47:15 +0100
That is not a helpful or useful comment. Moreover, all the products listed are aimed at the Enterprise backup market and offer similar features with slight variations. Your low opinion of the product
Author: Fazil Saiyed <Fazil.Saiyed AT ANIXTER DOT COM>
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 11:51:58 -0500
We all love networker and its capabilities, however the enterprise reality is that having working and feature knowledge of all available solution and ability to use them in the enterprise would be de
Author: Curtis Preston <cpreston AT GLASSHOUSE DOT COM>
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 14:01:08 -0400
over I agree that AFTDs are easier to manage in smaller environments. In a large environment, I believe the opposite. A _GOOD_ VTL makes it much easier to supply a large amount of disk as a target fo
Author: steve sorenson <networker.user AT GMAIL DOT COM>
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 11:47:31 -0700
I'll agree it wasn't helpful or useful, as the analogy was quite far from reality. and offer similar features with slight variations. While they do offer "similar" features, that is not to say that N
Author: Curtis Preston <cpreston AT GLASSHOUSE DOT COM>
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 15:01:05 -0400
Me too! ;) In no particular order: TSM is very good at moving data from one device to another in a very automated fashion. This comes from the fact that they've been doing disk staging a lot longer t