We've disabled Removable Storage service also.  It only causes
problems.

On the reordering, we found a persistent binding switch on our Qlogic
cards, and this took care of it.

We only let certain storage nodes backup to certain pools, then the
pools to specific drives.  This prevents the crossover.


David L. King


-----Original Message-----
From: Legato NetWorker discussion [mailto:NETWORKER AT LISTSERV.TEMPLE DOT EDU]
On Behalf Of Teresa Biehler
Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 11:40 AM
To: NETWORKER AT LISTSERV.TEMPLE DOT EDU
Subject: [I] Re: [Networker] DDS

I agree, when it's working, the backup rate is excellent.  Problems
we've seen:
- Windows storage nodes resetting the tapes during a backup.  Every
rewind results in lost data.  The "solution" is to disable the removable
storage service.  Well, Windows servers get reloaded, the admin forgets
to disable the server and data gets lost.
- Windows storage nodes re-ordering tape drives.  Again, this resulted
in tape rewinds because suddenly the storage node was addressing tape0
as tape1.  NetWorker "got confused" and allowed a tape rewind on a tape
that was doing a backup.
- One storage node would start backups on all the shared tape drives and
these backups would still be running when another storage node needed a
drive.  Backups end up going over the network instead of over the SAN.

Our NW server is Solaris.  I don't know if we'd have better luck using
DDS with all Solaris storage nodes.

-Teresa

> Hi,
>
>
> What are peoples experience of using DDS with dedicated storage nodes?
>
> We've been using this arrangement for several months, when it's all 
> working the backup rate is excellent, but whole thing seems very 
> problematic. Also, when there is an issue, we never seem to able to
get
> to the bottom of what went wrong.
>
> A Networker reseller has recently told us they advise their customers 
> against using DDS. Something along the lines that DDS is effectively 
> removing/attaching a SCSI device from a running server.....which
causes
> problems.  If that's correct that would be a fairly fundamental flaw
in
> the design...?
>
>
>
> Thanks
> Nick
>
> 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
> wit 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
>

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
wit 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

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 wit 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

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
wit 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