Networker

Re: [Networker] AFTD volume best practice: maximum size?

2008-08-30 22:48:11
Subject: Re: [Networker] AFTD volume best practice: maximum size?
From: Peter Viertel <Peter.Viertel AT MACQUARIE DOT COM>
To: NETWORKER AT LISTSERV.TEMPLE DOT EDU
Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2008 12:41:45 +1000
Can't find it in the doco just now but I recall there is an upper limit
on the number of savesets on an adv_file volume, something like 15000 -
how many savesets are they getting up to before you get problems? 

-----Original Message-----
From: EMC NetWorker discussion [mailto:NETWORKER AT LISTSERV.TEMPLE DOT EDU] On
Behalf Of tkimball
Sent: Friday, 29 August 2008 6:56 PM
To: NETWORKER AT LISTSERV.TEMPLE DOT EDU
Subject: [Networker] AFTD volume best practice: maximum size?

Well, the largest AFTDs I have are just over 15 TB, and they've been
happy enough after 4 years.  However, they're VxVM/VxFS controlled (Sol
8 ).  I considered larger, but due to initial choices on the block size
I've hit the max for now.

Since you mention ZFS, trying to 'shrink' the volume is not possible.
Do you have enough disk to attempt to create a temporary, smaller AFTD
ZFS pool and transfer (perhaps using snapshots)?

--TSK



Alan Rubin wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> We are running NetWorker 7.3.3 on a T2000 with Solaris 10 08/07.  We
use ZFS for
> our AFTDs and we are able to grow them quite large.  We get our
storage from a
> SAN currently made up of an IBM DS4800 and a DS6800.  Our largest AFTD
volume is
> 16.4TB, but we have been seeing "media emergency" errors in our logs
and
> encountering RPC errors on backups.  The OS reports no errors on the
disk
> devices, and ZFS sees no issues with the zpool.    If we do a full
reset of
> NetWorker we can get at least one good day out of the backups without
issue - no
> problems talking to the AFTD.  And we aren't having any issues with
our smaller
> AFTDs, also built on ZFS.  And no problems with our tape backups.
Even worse,
> the backup session starts off the nightly backup with successful
backups to the
> AFTD in question before it starts failing.
> 
> So, is there a recommended maximum size for an AFTD and we've just
gotten too
> big?  Or, is this just more aggravation from NetWorker?  Can anyone
shine any
> light on this?
> 
> 


+----------------------------------------------------------------------
|This was sent by t.s.kimball AT gmail DOT com via Backup Central.
|Forward SPAM to abuse AT backupcentral DOT com.
+----------------------------------------------------------------------

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

NOTICE
This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and may contain copyright 
material of Macquarie Group Limited or third parties. If you are not the 
intended recipient of this email you should not read, print, re-transmit, store 
or act in reliance on this e-mail or any attachments, and should destroy all 
copies of them. Macquarie Group Limited does not guarantee the integrity of any 
emails or any attached files. The views or opinions expressed are the author's 
own and may not reflect the views or opinions of Macquarie Group Limited.

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

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>