This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C2C25D.79651550
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Which is an important point to remember when you run cumulative
incrementals. I added one system with 100 gig to our backups and it did all
100 gig for 3 days until it hit a full in the schedule (one very safely
backed up system :)
-----Original Message-----
From: scott.kendall AT abbott DOT com [mailto:scott.kendall AT abbott DOT com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 1:45 PM
To: Fabbro, Andrew P
Cc: 'markjessup AT northwesternmutual DOT com';
'veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu'; veritas-bu-admin AT
mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] Using Archive bit vs Modified Date withNetbacku p
as for the advantage you listed... it's actually not true.
it's a "FEATURE" of NetBackup that when you add a client in a new policy it
will force a full for the first backup, instead of the incremental, when the
incremental window is open and the window for a full isn't... however, even
though it will back up everything on the system (as if it were a full), the
schedule name still says incremental (which means it uses the incremental
retention, bpstart/bpend, etc.).
also something to think about if you are renaming your policies. it can be
a shock the first time you rename a policy and then find out your backups
ran longer than expected because every client in that policy did a full the
same night.
- Scott
"Fabbro, Andrew P" <Fabbro.Andrew AT cnf DOT com>
Sent by: veritas-bu-admin AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
01/21/2003 12:52 PM
To: "'markjessup AT northwesternmutual DOT com'"
<markjessup AT northwesternmutual DOT com>
cc: "'veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu'"
<veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu>
Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] Using Archive bit vs Modified Date
with Netbacku p
The archive bit is evil ;)
It's just too easy to reset and any admin on the client can perform
functions that will nuke it. This leads to cases where the backup admin is
in trouble because something wasn't backed up (and can't be restored) but
has no way to determine why something wasn't backed up.
Your mileage may vary. The only advantage I can think of is that you can
create a new policy, drop a client into it, and the incremental will still
be an incremental. If you do that with Unix clients, your first incremental
will be a full because a new policy means a new "last backed up" time, set
to 0 initially. But how often do you do that?
-----Original Message-----
From: markjessup AT northwesternmutual DOT com
[mailto:markjessup AT northwesternmutual DOT com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 10:34 AM
To: veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
Subject: [Veritas-bu] Using Archive bit vs Modified Date with Netbackup
We are converting to Netbackup and was curious what is the best practice for
backing up changed files on Netware, NT, and W2K platforms. Do people rely
on the "Archive Bit" or the "Modified Bit". Is one better than the other or
is there any known issues with one or the other with Netbackup. Do they
both work fine with incrementals and cumulative differentials? Any other
info or gotchas you could provide would be great. Thanks!
Mark Jessup
IS Manager, Enterprise Storage and Output Management Northwestern Mutual
(414) 665-3968
markjessup AT northwesternmutual DOT com
_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist - Veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
------_=_NextPart_001_01C2C25D.79651550
Content-Type: text/html;
charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1126" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN class=007203521-22012003>Which
is an important point to remember when you run cumulative incrementals. I added
one system with 100 gig to our backups and it did all 100 gig for 3 days until
it hit a full in the schedule (one very safely backed up system
:)</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=007203521-22012003></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Tahoma
size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> scott.kendall AT abbott DOT
com
[mailto:scott.kendall AT abbott DOT com]<BR><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, January 22,
2003
1:45 PM<BR><B>To:</B> Fabbro, Andrew P<BR><B>Cc:</B>
'markjessup AT northwesternmutual DOT com'; 'veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn
DOT edu';
veritas-bu-admin AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu<BR><B>Subject:</B> RE:
[Veritas-bu]
Using Archive bit vs Modified Date withNetbacku p<BR><BR></FONT></DIV><BR><FONT
face=Arial size=2>as for the advantage you listed... it's actually not
true.</FONT> <BR><BR><FONT face=Arial size=2>it's a "FEATURE" of NetBackup that
when you add a client in a new policy it will force a full for the first
backup,
instead of the incremental, when the incremental window is open and the window
for a full isn't... however, even though it will back up everything on the
system (as if it were a full), the schedule name still says incremental (which
means it uses the incremental retention, bpstart/bpend, etc.).</FONT>
<BR><BR><FONT face=Arial size=2>also something to think about if you are
renaming your policies. it can be a shock the first time you rename a
policy and then find out your backups ran longer than expected because every
client in that policy did a full the same night.</FONT> <BR><BR><BR><FONT
face=Arial size=2>- Scott</FONT> <BR><BR><BR><BR>
<TABLE width="100%">
<TBODY>
<TR vAlign=top>
<TD>
<TD><FONT face=sans-serif size=1><B>"Fabbro, Andrew P"
<Fabbro.Andrew AT cnf DOT com></B></FONT> <BR><FONT face=sans-serif
size=1>Sent by: veritas-bu-admin AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu</FONT>
<P><FONT face=sans-serif size=1>01/21/2003 12:52 PM</FONT> <BR></P>
<TD><FONT face=Arial size=1> </FONT><BR><FONT
face=sans-serif size=1> To:
"'markjessup AT northwesternmutual DOT com'"
<markjessup AT northwesternmutual DOT com></FONT> <BR><FONT
face=sans-serif
size=1> cc:
"'veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu'"
<veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu></FONT> <BR><FONT
face=sans-serif
size=1> Subject:
RE:
[Veritas-bu] Using Archive bit vs Modified Date with Netbacku
p</FONT></TR></TBODY></TABLE><BR><BR><BR><FONT face="Courier New" size=2>The
archive bit is evil ;)<BR><BR>It's just too easy to reset and any admin on the
client can perform<BR>functions that will nuke it. This leads to cases
where the backup admin is<BR>in trouble because something wasn't backed up (and
can't be restored) but<BR>has no way to determine why something wasn't backed
up. <BR><BR>Your mileage may vary. The only advantage I can think
of
is that you can<BR>create a new policy, drop a client into it, and the
incremental will still<BR>be an incremental. If you do that with Unix
clients, your first incremental<BR>will be a full because a new policy means a
new "last backed up" time, set<BR>to 0 initially. But how often do you do
that?<BR><BR><BR><BR>-----Original Message-----<BR>From:
markjessup AT northwesternmutual DOT com<BR>[mailto:markjessup AT
northwesternmutual DOT com]
<BR>Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 10:34 AM<BR>To:
veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu<BR>Subject: [Veritas-bu] Using Archive
bit vs
Modified Date with Netbackup<BR><BR><BR>We are converting to Netbackup and was
curious what is the best practice for<BR>backing up changed files on Netware,
NT, and W2K platforms. Do people rely<BR>on the "Archive Bit" or the
"Modified Bit". Is one better than the other or<BR>is there any known
issues with one or the other with Netbackup. Do they<BR>both work fine
with incrementals and cumulative differentials? Any other<BR>info or
gotchas you could provide would be great. Thanks!<BR><BR><BR><BR>Mark
Jessup <BR>IS Manager, Enterprise Storage and Output Management Northwestern
Mutual<BR>(414)
665-3968<BR>markjessup AT northwesternmutual DOT
com<BR><BR><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>Veritas-bu
maillist -
Veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT
edu<BR>http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu<BR></FONT><BR><BR></BODY></HTML>
------_=_NextPart_001_01C2C25D.79651550--
|
