Networker

Re: [Networker] Backing up ISCSI LUNS

2009-09-09 22:28:21
Subject: Re: [Networker] Backing up ISCSI LUNS
From: Preston de Guise <enterprise.backup AT GMAIL DOT COM>
To: NETWORKER AT LISTSERV.TEMPLE DOT EDU
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2009 12:24:35 +1000
During backups, the client is backing up the server with a saveset of All, which works ok in that it backs up /u00, /u00/work, and / u00/staging as different save sets, which is what you would expect it to do. But what it's not doing is skipping the "work" and "staging" directories when it's backing up the /u00 save set. I think it's because the client doesn't know that the work and staging directories are ISCSI mounts. If these were NFS mount points, then they would be skipped as part of the backup of /u00.

I ran some reports after the backup finished, and the backup for / u00 was much larger than it should have been.

I'm going to open up a ticket with EMC once I do some more testing and I can give them more information.
Opening a case with EMC on this would be a waste of time because NetWorker is behaving as intended and as we'd expect. iSCSI is effectively meant to be presented as local storage, in the same way that a SAN/FC presented LUN should appear as local storage.
As such, NetWorker is doing the right thing - it wants to back it up.
To work around it - e.g., if you want to backup the LUN via the RedHat host or in some other fashion, you need to setup directives to skip/ignore those filesystems.

I'm going to disagree with Preston. Either, NetWorker should backup /u00 and not see /u00/work and /u00/staging as separate savesets, or it should see them as separate savesets and not backup / u00/work and /u00/staging as part of /u00 as well as separately.

You should definitely open an issue with EMC -- one piece or the other is wrong.

Ah, my apologies to Dave. Francis, you're entirely right - and this will serve me right to read and respond to the mailing list _before_ I've had my morning coffee and put my glasses on. I misread what was going wrong, and completely agree - if the filesystems are appearing as 3 separate units, but NetWorker is traversing the mountpoints to backup (and you're not using save -x), then it's definitely a problem.

Cheers,

Preston.

--
Preston de Guise


"Enterprise Systems Backup and Recovery: A Corporate Insurance Policy":

http://www.amazon.com/Enterprise-Systems-Backup-Recovery-Corporate/dp/1420076396

http://www.enterprisesystemsbackup.com

NetWorker blog: http://nsrd.wordpress.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

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